Categories
Mindprint the subconscious art code Structural art analysis using mindprint Structuralist analysis of miniature artworks

Artistic logic in Henry Holiday’s Hunting of the Snark

The nonsense limerick poem Hunting of the Snark demonstrates several ironies, apparent contradictions, and hidden meanings. The quest is an analogy for scientific exploration and British empire enterprise; both could be imagined in the dock on charges of Trespass, Libel and Contempt as in Barrister’s dream. Author Lewis Carroll (1876) is the pen-name of Oxford mathematician Rev Charles Lutwidge Dodgson (d1898), who also wrote maths papers and books, and was a deacon, but not a full priest. This post applies archetypal structuralist analysis to the Snark for the first time, to demonstrate how Henry Holiday’s illustrations subconsciously express apparently different, yet structurally standard versions of universal archetypal layers. The artist added Hope and Care (or ‘With’) to the crew of ten, probably from a subconscious compulsion to complete the minimum number of characters required to express archetype.

Britain, a legacy of Rome despite her abandonment in the Dark Ages of AD 400s to rival raiders and local kings such as Arthur, regained Roman culture after the Norman conquest. The eventual nation of shopkeepers, brokers, bankers and explorers feared disorder and chaos, as psychological defense against personal annihilation (after Kelly). Religion and science have taken turns in shoring up a sense of order. Bellman’s Rule of Three; character names all starting with B; jaunty rhyme and meter; and a tragic-comic format, all attempt to impose some order [15] and meaning on the apparent chaos of lefend. But motifs in legend, poetry and art is never random or meaningless, and usually recurrent (Thompson1928, 1961. Uther 2011. McCormic 2011). Rigorous analyses of three illustrations below demonstrate that many features of subconscious behaviour, perception, and meaning itself is now measurable in standard terms (see also ATU catalogue legends demonstrated in afterlife themes, in three posts on Oracle of the Dead, on http://www.stoneprintjournal.wordpress.com).

Nonsense style was also used by Thomas Hood; and in Gilbert and Sullivan musicals, such as Bad Ballads; and in early movies by Charlie Chaplin. Carroll was a satirist, and keenly aware of controversies between religion and science. Snarking once described a sound, perhaps of derision. Snarky once meant snappish, sarcastic, impertinent or irreverent; but recently back-formed again to mean mocking irreverence or sarcasm. The poem may have been inspired by the violent death of Carroll’s beloved uncle, Robert Wilfred Skeffington Lutwidge, inspector of asylums, by a violent patient (Torrey et al 2001), and other personal losses.

In the plot, a crew of ten tries to hunt the Snark, easily confused with the highly dangerous Boojum. Baker may symbolise the author, with his 42 boxes after Thomas Cranmer’s 42 Articles of religion, the last on eternal damnation. Baker finds a snark but vanishes in black ash, indicating that he found a Boojum, perhaps punished as Cranmer was burned; perhaps bafflement at finding laws of nature (Cohen 1995). Banker is attacked by a Bandersnatch, pays a ransom, but loses his sanity or logic.

Unwritten rules in nature and culture

Bellman, according to Carroll’s preface, follows obscure Naval Code, pathetically reading out Admiralty Instructions which none of the crew ever understood, “but fastened anyhow across the rudder”. Rule 42, the last, is ‘No one shall speak to the Man at the Helm,’ completed by the Bellman himself with ‘and the Man at the Helm shall speak to no one’. Thus Carroll indicates that the search for unwritten, inherent rules or laws of nature and numbers are part of his theme in Snark. Collective behaviour is indeed guided by a code that many sciences suspected, but no-one understood before 2010 (Furter 2014).

The present study of recurrent features in behaviour, to reveal archetype in nature and culture (Furter 2014; 2016), was inspired partly by the Mike Batt’s musical version of Hunting of the snark. In this idiom, from our own investigations and the bearings on the charts, now we could rise to remark that we think we may be gaining on the snark! There are hints of underlying structure in all media. Discovery that the subconscious expression of archetypal structure, or mindprint, could be measured and predicted, incidentally completes the quest for inherent order; and reveals that cultural identity is as universal as mathematics.

Henry Holiday pictured fables, allegories and church windows

Henry Holiday probably alluded to animals in a 1674 print of Aesop’s Fables, illustrated by Marcus Gheeraerts the Elder (British Museum; Satires 1047, reg. 1868,0808.3286), around king William III with allegorical Religion and Liberty (after Prof L Wolsogen, L; Fig 4/4). Holiday discussed with the author Carroll (Dodgson) possible allegorical depictions of Care and Hope. Holiday was also a stained glass window designer at Powell & Sons (with many designs for American churches), and friend of Rossetti. Tigertail Associates hired artist George Gennerich to restore Holiday’s wood engravings electronically, and partly colorise them.

Holiday’s Banker’s Fate illustration may refer to Image-Breakers by Marcus Gheeraerts the Elder; and to William Sidney Mount’s painting, Bone Player; and to a photograph by Benjamin Duchenne used for a drawing in Charles Darwin’s Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals. These visual citations together demonstrate that art design never replicates other designs; yet the illustration demonstrates again that all complex designs (of more than eleven characters) express specific, complex, universal spatial grammar, beyond the conscious capacity of any artist to learn or fake. Snark’s sections are named Fits, a pun on fitting rhymes to syllabic meters and pages. Structuralist analysis of the formerly invisible five layers of regular, universal features in the artworks, and probably in the character list, now adds another meaning to ‘fit’; artists have to ‘rhyme’ with the inherent structure in meaning and spatial relationships.

Carroll’s Easter sacrifice tragedy

Carroll re-uses a setting, some creatures, and eight portmanteau words from Carroll’s earlier poem, Jabberwocky, in his children’s novel Through the Looking-Glass (1871). The poem is dedicated to a young girl whom Carroll met at Sandown on the Isle of Wight, which he saw as an island of three monsters, “where the Jabberwock was slain”. In the first edition, he included a religious tract; An Easter Greeting to Every Child Who Loves Alice, perhaps to disguise the dark undertone of the pointless expedition, melting identity, apparently unjust punishments of life, and annihilation. Easter Greeting explores innocence and eternal life through Biblical and Romantic allusions from William Blake and William Wordsworth. Yet Easter is a spring sacrifice ritual, thus also a tragedy. Among many legacies of the Snark, are a graph theory; Snark Island in India’s Bengal Bay; Boojum Rock in Andaman and Nicobar Islands; and the excellent but failed 2-m dollar West End musical by Mike Batt.

Motley crew; it takes all types to make a story

The Hunting of the snark crew is listed here by proposed archetypal numbers and the types they probably subconsciously express in Carroll’s text; all named starting with the letter B:

2 Builder; Billiard-maker (builder), skillfull (hero). Or 9; 2v9.

2c Basket; Bandersnatch or subconscious, takes ransom and sanity (monster).

3 Queen; Butcher, math and geology, kills (sacrifice) only beavers.

4 King; Care or ‘With’, a Pandora, added by the artist.

5 Priest; Hope or Britannia, added by the artist.

6 Exile; Bellman, leader (exile).

7 Child; Broker, appraises goods, Jewish.

07g Galactic Centre; ??

9 Healer; Bonnet-maker (lid), hood-maker. Or 2; 2v9.

10 Teacher; Banker holds the crew’s money (balance, metal), loses logic.

11 Womb; Hope? or Britannia’s womb.

13 heart; Beaver (water-work), savious, makes lace.

14 Mixer; Hope? or Britannia.

15 Maker; Barrister, settles arguments.

15g Galactic Gate; Boots, cobbler (‘bag’), invisible or in a barrel (‘bag’).

Axial centre; Snark, of five signs, invisible, confused with Boojum.

04p Pig in dream, accused of deserting its sty.

11p Baker, wedding cakes, courageous, forgetful, vanishes.

Midsummer and Midwinter; Boojum, deadly illogic [3 12], invisible, confused with snark since it moves with time.

Dominant type 5 Priest, of assembly and ritual

Dominant general themes in Holiday’s illustration of Lewis Carroll’s Hunting of the Snark crew or Britannia parade, are revealed by extra features of type 5 Priest, typical of assembly, hyperactivity, ritual, ceremony (here including speeches in the text), sashes (robes) and water (implied by the naval crew); and its opposite type, 13 Heart, typical of weapons (pitchforks and a pitch fork, or tuning fork), war (implied colonisation), bravery and water-work (here implied by a beaver and anchor). This type seems appropriate to part of Rev Carroll’s own identity as a Deacon, and to the conscious theme of colonial and scientific exploration, including vague unease of venturing into foreign territories and somewhat taboo fields of science. Some authors have suggested a theme of search for happiness; or of USA independence and its motto of ‘pursuit of happiness’ as a tragedy for Britain.

Secondary general themes in the Snark parade illustration, include types 5c Basket Tail, typical of oracle, revelation (a vague monster or treasure), and maze (uncharted excursion); and 9c Basket Lid, of hats, instruments, enforcement, and metal (pitchforks, blunderbuss, anchor, sword); and 10 Teacher, of raised arms, staffs (pitchforks, anchor, blunderbuss, tripod), hunt-master (Bellman), guard, market (implied colonisation), council and school (Barrister’s toga); and type 15 Maker, of rope, order (names starting with B), bag, mace, sceptre (empire), doubling (Barrister and Banker resemblance), face (personalities as on coin ‘heads’, obverse of Britannia as ‘tails’). Missing from the illustrations are Boots the invisible cobbler, who may be a subconscious snark; and Baker, missing since attempting to unravel a conundrum; and Boojum, perhaps incomprehensible ultimate reality or archetype itself. This list below reports the characters in the parade illustration, in the standard structuralist anthropology archetypal cycle format.

Henry Holiday; Hunting of the snark parade illustration for Lewis Carroll (Charles Dodgson, mathematician, 1876). Woodcut by Joseph Swain. Colorised by George Gennerich for Tigertail Associates. Archetype labels and axial grid by E Furter.

Type Label; Parade character (noting archetypal features):

2 Builder; Bonnet-maker? with a fork.

3 Queen; Butcher? (sacrifice) with a chopper?

4 King; Care? in cloak.

5 Priest; Hope? or Britannia (assembly) as emblem (ritual), with anchor (hyperactive, water) and sword (weapon, of 13 opposite); her right eye.

5c Basket Tail; Bell (time, of 6v14). And anchor blade.

6 Exile; Hope? or Britannia, near the axial centre (ingress) with anchor (U-shape); her left eye. And Bellman with bell (U-shape).

7 Child; Anchor point (eyeless, rope implied), as emblem (mace).

7g Gal.Centre; Banker’s top hat (vortex). And anchor point (juncture).

9 Healer; Banker (metal) carrying (bent forward, strong) blunderbuss (metal), tripod stand (pillar) and pitch or tuning fork (metal, trance), a pun on pitchfork; his right eye.

9c Basket Lid; Banker’s glasses (disc, ‘balance’).

10 Teacher; Banker (balance, metal) or Broker (trade), with pitch-fork or tuning fork (metal, ‘balance’) raised (arm up), tripod (staff) and blunderbuss (hunt-master, guard, metal); his left eye.

11 Womb; Midriff (womb) of Hope? or Britannia (water, law), implied British lion (felid).

12 Heart; Beaver (water-work), OFF THE GRID.

13 Heart; Barrister’s chest (heart), carrying a pitchfork (weapon, war).

13c Basket Head; Barrister’s beard (weave).

14 Mixer; Anchor ring, NO EYE, nearer the centre (ingress).

15 Maker; Barrister (order) with wig (ropes), in toga (bag), carrying pitchfork (mace), striding ahead (rampant), with a large face (face), resembling Banker (doubled).

Axial centre; Unmarked as usual.

4p Gal.S.Pole; Britannia’s ear?

11p Gal.Pole; Anchor’s cross-bar ruing (juncture). And sea-star (limb-joints) at Beaver’s tail (limb-joint). And Beaver, a lace-maker (rope is more typical of 7g) carrying a microscope.

Midsummer; Britannia’s front shoulder (limb-joint).

Midwinter; Hope’s hip (limb-joint). These solstice markers are on a horizontal plane. The polar triangles place midsummer in Gemini-Taurus, implying spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Pisces-Aquarius, confirmed by the two types at top centre.

The snark crew parade analysis score is 45/68 archetypal features; 12/16 axial points; 4/4 c-type sector features; 2/2 g-gate sector features; 4/5 polar markers; 1/2 planar or cardinal orientations; 1/1 correlation with the Age, or Age prior to the work; 2/2 general themes; thus 71/100, minus 1 extra characters off the axial grid; total 70%, in the upper half of the average range of 40-80%. All structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

Butcher and beaver calculate a song in Holiday’s snark art

Structuralist analysis of this illustration happens to co-incide with the theme of Butcher transcribing and calculating a Jubjub’s song, “or the sound of pencil on slate”, for his willing student Beaver. Carroll’s limerick is partly themed on a quest to find natural laws, identity and meaning. His tale has no resolution other than confirming baffling inexplicability, but his mathematics papers, and the present study, have better news. Snark episode illustrations, characters, and parts of the plot subconsciously express archetypal and thus natural and cultural order. In this context, the text acquires much more order than the rhyme, meter and plot provide.

“The thing shall be done! Bring me paper and ink, the best there is time to procure. The Beaver brought paper, portfolio, pens, and ink in unfailing supplies: while strange creepy creatures came out of their dens, and watched them with wondering eyes. So engrossed was the Butcher, he heeded them not, as he wrote with a pen in each hand, and explained all the while in a popular style, which the Beaver could well understand.”

The ‘strange creatures’ crowding into the story and the illustration repeats a motif familiar in religious art; temptation by delights and torments, usually shown with St Anthony (see a post on Oracles of the Dead Part II, on www.stoneprintjournal.wordpress.com). The illustrator was a church window designer by trade, thus well versed in religious art.

Dominant general themes in Henry Holiday’s illustration for the scene of the Butcher as author, artist and mathematician, include these types:

[] 4 King, of squat posture (here of nine characters), twins (here dragons, frogs, pigs, cats), rectangle (music boxes, books);

[] 6 Exile, of ingress (Beaver and Butcher near the centre), double-head (dragons, frogs, pigs, cats), reptile (dragons, frogs); and its opposite, 14 Mixer, of ingress (crowding in a narrow vale), transform (music to math), angel (winged rat, dragons, pigs), reptile, dance (of flying pigs);

[] 10 Teacher, of raised arms (here all twelve characters), metal (brass instruments, boxes), ecology (beasts), school (Butcher teaching Beaver math), carousel (dancing beasts);

[] 15 Maker, of order (books), doubled (dragons, pigs, frogs, cats), reptile, winged;

[] 2c v9c, 5c v13c Baskets, of instruments (music, writing), container (music boxes, ink-well), hat (Butcher’s beaver hat), or secret (Jubjub song and math score).

This artwork is remarkable for its general themes expressing the three known features that are ambiguous for being optional part of three or four types: reptile; winged; doubling (though it tends to take different forms in types 4, 6, 15). In addition, twinning and doubling is present in many visual citations of other artists as Kluge (2017) demonstrated. But canid of type 9, 10, 14, 15; and equid of types 3, 4, 5, are absent here. The known ambiguities are inherent in nature and culture, and appear at fixed average percentages, thus they are as archetypal and measurable as the unambiguous features, and the five layers of structure in spatial expression are.

Henry Holiday; Hunting of the snark Butcher calculating a jubub song, in the illustration for Lewis Carroll (Dodgson 1876). The woodcut is by Joseph Swain, later colorised by George Gennerich for Tigertail Associates. Archetype labels and axial grid by E Furter.

Type Label; Maths music character (noting archetypal features):

2 Builder; Pig trumpeter A in orchestra (cluster).

2c Basket; Music box B (instrument, container) churned (arm-link) by dragon B.

3 Queen; Bellman (school).

4 KingA; Dragon B (twin), winged (‘bird’), on rock (squat) with music box (rectangle).

4 KingB; Rat flying (bird), squeezing ink.

5a Priest; Dragon (reptile, winged) with music box (hyperactive). These boxes may refer to religious articles of faith, as of Thomas Cranmer (implied priest).

5c Basket Tail; Music box A (container).

6 ExileA; Butcher (sacrifice), near the centre (ingress); inner eye, as bard, in beaver hat (sacrifice).

6 ExileB; Butcher (sacrifice), near the centre (ingress); outer eye (‘double-headed’).

7 Child; Young (juvenile) frog’s bag (bag, eyeless) with newspaper (unfold).

7g Gal.Centre; Bonnet (vortex?) on cat A.

9 Healer; Cat C tearing (strong) a bonnet.

9c Basket Lid; Books (reveal) on a war treaty (enforce) and absurdity.

10 Teacher; Ink bottle B (school).

11 WombA; Beaver’s (water) midriff (womb), bearing ink (library).

11 WombB; Beaver’s (water) midriff (womb), bearing ink (library).

13 Heart; Frog’s chest (heart), drilling (rounded, weapon).

14 MixerA; Frog (reptile); inner eye.

14 MixerB; Frog (reptile); outer eye.

15 Maker; Pig with wings (winged) playing flute (‘sceptre’).

15g Gal.Gate; Tuba (juncture, vortex).

Axial centre; Unmarked as usual.

4p Gal.S.Pole; Butcher’s upper fingers (limb-joints).

11p Gal.Pole; Beaver’s elbow (limb-joint).

Midsummer; Pig A’s hoofs (limb-joint).

Midwinter; Butcher’s jaw (limb-joint) holding quill (juncture).

The solstice markers are on the horizontal plane. The polar triangles place midsummer in 14-15 or Cancer-/Gemini; implying spring and the cultural time-frame in Age 3-2 or Aries-Pisces, confirmed by the top central position of types 3 and 4.

The analysis score in the Butcher’s math scoring illustration, is 36/68 archetypal features; 16/16 axial points; 6/4 c-type sector features; 2/2 g-gate sector features; 4/5 polar markers; 1/2 planar or cardinal orientations; 1/1 correlation with the Age, or Age prior to the work; 2/2 general themes; thus 68/100, minus 3 extra characters off the axial grid; total 65%, just above the universal average of 60%. Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

Barrister’s courtroom trial dream scene

Barrister’s courtroom trial dream illustration by Henry Holiday has only nine characters, thus fewer than eleven, and is considered a minimalist artwork, wherein some structuralist compromises, and fewer than 60% of the known archetypal features are expected. Some characters and some structuralist features are doubled, as in his Butcher music and maths lesson scene.

Main general themes in this courtroom illustration are types 10 Teacher, of arms up posture (here of five characters), hunt-master (prosecution), disc (two wigs, dram fog), council (court); and type 11 Womb, of womb (here or the sleeping Barrister), law (trial).

Henry Holiday; Hunting of the snark courtroom trial scene illustration for Lewis Carroll. Woodcut by Joseph Swain. Colorised by George Gennerich for Tigertail Associates. Archetype labels and axial grid by E Furter.

Type Label; Court character (noting archetypal features):

1 Builder; NO EYE, Keys (cluster, implied twist, tower, build, maze). And; NO EYE, Prosecutor’s left hand holding rolled (twisted) charge sheet (book).

2 Builder; OFF THE GRID Jailer (implied tower, build).

2c Basket; Judge’s wig (weave, shoulder-hump, hat). And bench (throne).

3 Queen; Barrister or judge (school?), representing the Crown (queen).

4 KingA; NO EYE, Prosecutor.

4 KingB; Advocate A.

5a Priest; Advocate B In tails (tailcoat head) judging (judge, assembly).

5c Basket Tail; Advocate C, between axes, as c-types are.

6 Exile; Advocate D, far from the centre (egress).

7 Child; Accused in dock (rope?).

7g Gal.Centre; Fog end (water).

8 Healer; Prosecutor’s right hand, in cloak (trance? See Tarot trump 9, Hermit in hood).

9c Basket Lid; Fog middle (lid) of a dream (reveal).

10 Teacher; Prosecutor (‘hunt-master’) with arms up (arms up) or prop (staff) holding wig (disc, council).

11 WombA; Sleeping Barrister’s (law) midriff (womb), under fog (water).

11 WombB; Sleeping Barrister’s (law) midriff (womb), under fog (water).

12 Heart; Sleeping Barrister’s chest (heart).

13c Basket Head; Sleeping Barrister’s wig (head, hat, weave).

14 Mixer; Sleeping Barrister dreaming (transform).

15 Maker; NO EYE, Hand of Bellman ringing (order, smite).

15g Gal.Gate; Bellman’s hand (limb-joint), lifting fog from sleep to waking (juncture).

Axial centre; Prosecutor’s bow knot (juncture).

4p Gal.S.Pole; Advocate A’s talking jaw (limb-joint).

11p Gal.Pole; Sleeping Barrister’s elbow (limb-joint).

Midsummer; Charge of Trespass (juncture).

Midwinter; Advocate B’s demonstrating fingers (limb-joint).

The solstice markers are on a horizontal plane. The polar triangles place midsummer in 15-1 or Gemini-Taurus; implying spring and the cultural time-frame in Age 4-5 or Pisces-Aquarius. Pisces is confirmed by the top central position of types 4A and 4B.

The analysis score in the snark courtroom scene is 21/68 archetypal features; 14/16 axial points; 8/4 c-type sector features; 3/2 g-gate sector features; 3/5 polar markers; 1/2 planar or cardinal orientations; 1/1 correlation with the Age, or Age prior to the work; 2/2 general themes; thus 53/100, minus 2 extra characters off the axial grid; total 51%, in the lower half of the universal average range of 40-80%. Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

  • See a list of currently known optional archetypal features in other posts.

Some sources and references

Carroll, L. 1876. Hunting of the snark. London; McMillan

Cohen, M. N. 1995. Lewis Carroll: A Biography. Macmillan

Furter, E. 2014. Mindprint, the subconscious art code. USA: Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2015a. Gobekli Tepe, between rock art and art. Expression 8. Italy: Atelier Etno

Furter, E. 2015b. Rock art expresses cultural structure. Expression 9. Italy: Atelier Etno

Furter, E. 2016. Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities. Johannesburg: Four Equators Media

Furter, E. 2017a. Recurrent characters in rock art reveal objective meaning. Expression 16, June. Italy: Atelier Etno

Furter, E. 2017b. Stoneprint tour of Paris. Stoneprint Journal 3. USA: Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2018a. ‘Babylonian Plough List decans’. http://www.stoneprintjournal.blog

Furter, E. 2018b. Stoneprint tour of London. Stoneprint Journal 4. USA: Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2018c. Culture code in seals and ring stamps. Stoneprint Journal 5. USA, Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2019a. Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour. Stoneprint Journal 6. USA, Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2019b. Ayahuasca artists express universal structure. DMT Times; Archetypes

Gennerich, G. 2004. Hunting of the snark illustrations restoration and coloration. Los Angeles; Tigertail Associates.

Jung, C.G. & Jaffe, A. 1965. Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Random House

Jung, C.G. 1945. Philosophical tree. In Collected Works 13: Alchemical Studies

Kluge, Goetz. 2017. Nose is a nose is a nose. Knight Letter 99, December, p30-31

McCormick, C.T.  2011. Folklore, an encyclopaedia of beliefs, customs, tales, music and art. Denver, Colorado; ABC-CLIO

Neugebauer, O. & Parker, R. 1969. Egyptian astronomical texts 3; Decans, planets, constellations and zodiacs. USA: Brown Univ Press

Roche, G.T. 2018. Temptation of St Anthony; on chemical mysticism. Academia.com

Thompson, S. 1928, 1961. Motif index of folk literature. Ellis ref GR 67.T52. http://www.StorySearch

Torrey, F, and Miller, Judy. 2001. Invisible Plague: The Rise of Mental Illness from 1750 to the Present. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press

Traveler, The. 2009. DMT Nexus. https://wiki.dmt-nexus.me/Hyperspace_lexicon

Uther, H.J. 2011. Types of International Folktales: A Classification and Bibliography. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica

Zipf, G.K. 1949. Human behavior and the principle of least effort. USA: Addison-Wesley

Categories
archetypes in religion Mindprint art examples Structural art analysis using mindprint

Archetypes in Notre Dame Paris cathedral

Paris Notre Dame medieval cathedral has a rich texture of legend, icons, allegory, symbols and ritual in its reliefs, sculptures, rose windows, tombs and artworks. This post is a virtual tour of the universal cycle of archetypes in the north-west portal relief of St Mary; the stained glass window of a Jesse Tree or ancestors of Christ (in the adjacent Holy Chapel); and the double axial grid in the cathedral’s floor plan of chapels, statues and tombs. Each of these imprints subconsciously express about 60% of the 100 known optional archetypal character features, sequence, axial grid, and time-frames. All complex artworks, buildings, and built sites express the same pattern.

The consistent presence of recurrent features in cultural media, is already demonstrated in large built sites such as Paris (Stoneprint Journal 3, Lulu.com) and London, with a smaller stoneprint in the London Tower site (Stoneprint Journal 4, Lulu.com). Inspiration sustains natural structure at several scales, including buildings, art, ritual, legends and alphabets (Furter 2019; Blueprint). This cathedral and its installation artworks compares in complexity with other religious sites and buildings of all ages, in Babylonia, Egypt, India, Europe, China, Mexico and Japan (Furter 2014; 2016; and Stoneprint Journal editions).

Archetype in Paris Notre Dame St Mary portal sculpture

The Life of St Mary portal relief on the stone tympanum (‘drum skin’) between the lintels above the north-west door in Paris Notre Dame cathedral, is divided into three registers. Her predicted life is symbolised by a library of prophetic scrolls, flanked by relevant prophets in the bottom register. The concept ‘library’ is one of the known recurrent features of type 11 Womb. Her death is illustrated in the middle, and her ascent to heaven at top. This carving subconsciously expresses about 60% of the 100 known archetypal features. And this installation artwork as a whole, also expresses type 5a Priest in the cathedral floor plan western stoneprint (see below). All complex buildings and built sites have similar structuralist expressions, testable by the stoneprint template of the natural structure or ‘grammar’ of meaning.

Themes of Build and Heal, King and Womb, Priest and Heart

Dominant general themes in St Mary portal of Paris Notre Dame, are revealed by extra features of six types on three axes:

  • Types 1 /2v8/9 Builder v Healer, typical of twisted postures (here of two kneelers, two outer apostles), cluster (angels, apostles, prophets), tower (registers and ranks), ruin (death), hero (ascended), book (scrolls); opposite bent-forward (two apostles over St Mary), pillar (eight in the bottom register), heal (ascended).
  • Types 4v11 King v Womb, of squat postures (here fourteen seated), king (queen of heaven crowned), twins (two angels in heaven, two angels over Mary); opposite womb (St Mary is pictured twice), tomb (central casket), interior (portal), library (scrolls, and apostles including gospel authors).
  • Types 5a/b v12/13 Priest v Heart, of priest (thirteen apostles), assembly, horizontal (Mary’s body), winged (ranks of angels, and four in the main panel); opposite death, rounded (lintels), angel (ranks).
Paris Notre Dame portal of St Mary’s predicted life in scrolls, her death, and ascent to heaven (after National Geographic. Archetype labels and axial grid by E Furter). The Mary portal subconsciously expresses many known features on the five layers of archetypal structure. On a larger scale, this installation artwork also expresses type 5a Priest in the cathedral floor plan western stoneprint. All complex buildings and built sites have similar structuralist expressions as a compulsive ‘grammar’, now testable by the stoneprint template of natural structure and meaning itself.

Type Label; Character (noting archetypal features):

1 Builder; Apostle C (cluster, hero, book).

2 Builder; Choir angel D (cluster, ‘bird’).

2c Basket; Angel A with candle (instrument, container) at throne (throne). C-types are off the axial grid, but between specific axes.

3 Queen; Choir angel E (‘school’) nearest St Mary (queen).

4 King; St Mary enthroned (squat, ‘king’).

And angel crowning (‘king’).

5a Priest; Choir angel H (assembly, winged).

5a-5b; Angel B with candle (‘priest’), OFF THE GRID.

5b Priest; Choir angel J (assembly, winged).

5c Basket Tail; Three apostles (reveal). C-types are off the axial grid, but between specific axes.

6 Exile; Apostle L, near the axial centre (ingress).

7 Child; Apostle M.

7g Gal.Centre; Tree B (juncture).

8 Healer; Apostle N, leaning (bent forward) on his hand, probably a mendicant (heal).

9 Healer; Prophet E (trance).

9c Lid; Scroll B (reveal, weave), and staff (‘pillar’).

10 Teacher; Prophet D (teacher, council) with staff (staff) and scroll (school).

11 Womb; St Mary’s midriff (womb), in death (tomb). And church model (law, library).

12 Heart; Prophet C.

13 Heart; Prophet B.

13c Basket Head; Prophet A (oracle). And St Peter’s key to heaven (transition). C-types are off the axial grid, but between specific axes.

14 Mixer; Apostle A, at a tree (tree).

15 Maker; St Peter, ‘Rock’ (smite), with heaven’s key (churn, order, sceptre).

15g Gal.Gate; Tree A (juncture).

00 Axial centre; Unmarked.

4p Gal.S.Pole; God’s jaw (limb-joint).

11p Gal.Pole; St Mary’s elbow (limb-joint).

Summer; An apostle’s shoulder (limb-joint).

Winter; An apostle’s jaw (limb-joint).

The solstice markers are between axes 6-15 and 7-15, analogous to Capricornus-Cancer and Sagittarius-Gemini, implying spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Aries-Pisces. The top central position of ascended St Mary as type 4 confirms Age Pisces, the constellation where the spring equinox was at the time (and up to 2016).

Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

Archetype in the Paris Notre Dame Sainte Chapelle family Tree of Jesse window

The Paris Notre Dame side chappel stained glass window of the family Tree of Jesse, or ancestors of Christ, is signed ‘Didron 1864’ in the Mary panel (11 in the list below), part of a restoration of that year. Some authors identify this sleeping ancestor as Jesse, but the axial grid is on the character’s midriff, a feature that in 87% of artworks worldwide indicate type 11 Womb in the eternal cycle that all artists subconsciously express. Jesse is probably the large character to her left, sleeping on his arm.

The model for modern genealogical trees is the metaphor of a stunted tree for Hebrew ancestors in Isaia, which two New Testament gospellers extended to Christ. King David as ‘a shoot from the stump of his father Jesse’ (1Sam16:1) of Bethlehem, prefigures Christ as a fruit (Is11:1. Winzen 2012). David fights Goliath (1Sam17) with a sling and a stick, on behalf of king Saul, as Achilles fought enemies for Agamemnon, as Christ fought Rome and the devil with a cross. David’s friend Jonathan, a son of Saul, loses his inheritance and gives his royal cloak, sword, bow and girdle to David (1Sam18:3), as Christ took the burden of kingship under oppression, for his friends (Joh15:13). David in exile in the desert receives holy bread (1Sam21:3) and the sword of Goliath, as Christ is tempted by bread in the desert. David spares Saul’s life, as Christ forgives Rome (1Sam24:6, 26:9). David, ‘Beloved’, and Christ, ‘Anointed’, were both born in Bethlehem (Luk2:11), anointed (Mat3:17), shepherds (1Sam17:34), attractive (1Sam16:12), and loving. David’s body was seen as Israel’s bones and flesh (2Sam5:1), as Paul saw the sacrificed Christ. David fought to liberate Israel, as Christ incited rebellion for spiritual freedom and passive resistance. Similar features and episodes appear in all other religions and myths, in all ages.

Matthew lists Christ’s ancestors as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah and Tamar, Perez/Phares [Egypt?], Hezron/Esrom, Ram/Aram, Aminadab, Nahshon, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse, David and Bathsheba, Solomon, Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, (omitting Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah), Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, (omitting Jehoiakim), Jeconiah, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Zadok Priest, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, Joseph, Christ.

Luke agrees with the Old Testament’s 77 ancestors, arranging them in five and a half groups of fourteen each, the last group of seven:

God, Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Maleleel, Jared, Enoch, Mathusala, Lamech, Noah, Shem, Arphaxad, Cainan;

Sala, Heber, Phalec, Ragau, Saruch, Nachor, Thara, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah A, Phares, Esrom, Aram;

Aminadab, Naasson, Salmon (Solomon), Boaz, Obed, Jesse, David, Nathan (another son of David), Mattatha, Menan, Melea, Eliakim, Jonam, Joseph A;

Judah, Simeon, Levi A, Matthat B, Jorim, Eliezer, Jose, Er, Elmodam, Cosam, Addi, Melchi, Neri, Salathiel;

Zorobabel, Rhesa, Joannan, Juda B, Mattathisas C, Maath, Nagge, Esli, Naum, Amos, Mattathias B, Joseph B;

Jannai, Melchi, Levi B, Matthat C, Heli, Joseph C carpenter, Christ.

Matthew’s genealogy involves gematria or number values of the name David.

SetA has annotations, including four mothers or queens, noting brothers of Judah, and the brother of Perez.

SetB is the Davidic royals, omitting some generations, ending with “Jeconiah and his brothers of the exile in Babylon.

SetC has thirteen generations, Joseph to Zerubbabel, via unknown names in Greek versions of Hebrew, as in the Septuagint, but with some peculiarities; Asaph for King Asa also refers to psalmist Asaph. Amos for King Amon also refers to prophet Amos, although the Septuagint does have this form. Both may assimilate familiar names. Unique forms are used in Boes for Boaz /Boos; Rachab for Rahab /Raab.

Matthew omits three consecutive kings of Judah: Ahaziah, Jehoash, Amaziah, considered wicked, of the cursed line of Ahab via his daughter Athaliah to third and fourth generations. He omits Jehoiakim/n, father of Jeconiah, Greek Joachim, noting “Josiah begot Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the exile.” Jehoiakim had brothers, but not Jeconiah of the time of exile. If Josiah’s son was intended as Jehoiakim, then Jeconiah could be counted after exile. Or Matthew had a Joseph as father of Mary, and another Joseph as husband, or perhaps father-husband, as in Egyptian practice.

Fourteen generations span from Jeconiah about BC 616, to Christ BC 04 or BC 07, if a generation were 44 years. The Old Testament has wider gaps, indicating omissions, perhaps of repeated grandparents’ names.

The New Testament says St Mary was also of the stem of Jesse. Fulcanelli noted that Hebrew ‘Jes’ means fire or sun, a royal symbol.

Themes of Build/Ruin, Sacrifice, Ritual, Weave

Dominant general themes in the Paris Notre Dame Tree of Jesse window, are revealed by extra features of types on several axes. Integration of conscious ‘programmes’, semi-conscious symbolism, and subconscious archetypal structure, indicate cultural maturity.

  • Types 1 /2v8/9 Builder v Healer, typical of twisted postures (here of nearly all the characters), cluster, hero, book (of prophets); opposite bent forward (five characters), strong (spiritual strength), disc (medallions format), trance (Jesse and Mary sleeping, Jacob and Moses and prophets’ visions).
  • Types 3v10 Queen v Teacher, of sacrifice; opposite raised arms (almost all the characters), staff (two staffs, two sceptres, and a ladder), metal (crowns), disc (medallion format), council (ancestors’ legacies).
  • Types 4v11 King v Womb, of squat postures (nearly all the characters), king (six); opposite womb (St Mary in foreground), tomb (ancestors), library (implied prophetic books).
  • Types 5a/b v12/13 Priest v Heart, of colours (stained glass), priest (priest-kings), assembly (ancestors recalled); opposite felid (house of Judah, lion icon), rounded (roundels), war (or conquest or defence), ancestor (the main theme).
  • Types 2cV13c, 5cV13c Basket, of weave (tree texture), container (roundels), tree (the main metaphor), reveal (oracles fulfilled), maze (columns and rows). C-types are off the axial grid, but between specific axes.
Paris Notre Dame stained glass window of the family Tree of Jesse, or ancestors of Christ. Structuralist analysis of the archetypes, sequence, and axial positions of eyes, reveal that the sleeping ancestor St Mary. The large character to her left, sleeping on his arm, is Jesse. The model for genealogical trees is a metaphor in Is11:1.

Type Label; Character (some of their archetypal features):

1 Builder; Ancestor (hero) turning (twist) from temptation.

2 Builder; Ancestor (hero), turning (twist).

2c Basket; A king (throne) with a staff (instrument, arm-link).

3 Queen; Ancestor thinking.

4 King; Christ (king) sitting (squat) with a lamb (ovid) outdoors (field).

5b Priest; Ancestor (assembly).

5c Tail; Item held by 5b (weave?, container?, tree?, reveal?).

6 Exile; Ancestor, probably a traveller, with pointed cap, with two angels or sons.

7 Child; God’s face (‘beheaded’) appears (unfold) to Moses in a cloud (‘bag’).

And a king with a sceptre. See also Midwinter below.

7g Gal.Centre; Moses kneels (bent, of 8) on Sinai.

And apparition (juncture) on Sinai.

8 Healer; Jacob (trance) carrying (bent, strong) a ladder (‘pillar’, trance), with angel. Ladder was also an allegory for alchemy. At Bethel, ‘House of God’ (tower, of 1v8), he dreamt of a Gate (7g) of Heaven (Gen35:1), and an altar struck (1v8. As Tarot trump 1:16, Tower struck by lightning).

9 Healer; Ancestor with staff (‘pillar’), predicting (trance) St Mary and Christ child in a halo (disc).

9c Lid; King David playing (arm-link) harp (instrument, weave), singing (reveal), warrior for God (enforce), with crown (disc, ring, hat, metal).

10 Teacher; Jesse, father of David, sleeping (trance, of 9c) on his arm (raised arm), wearing a cap (disc). Largest character, since the entire window is his family ‘tree’ (‘staff’, ‘ecology’).

11 Womb; St Mary’s midriff (womb), sleeping, impregnated (womb) by Holy Spirit.

12 Heart; Noah’s chest (heart), with model Ark (water-work).

14 Mixer; John Baptist (transform), foretelling (time) Mary’s godly child (transform). His disciples were Essenians. His anointing as Forgiver was announced by arch-angel Gabriel (Luke1).

13c Head; Vision (oracle) cloudburst (‘container’, weave) of Mary and Christ child. C-types are off the axial grid, but between specific axes.

15 Maker; An ancestor (maker) with scroll or charter (order).

And a king… nearest the axial centre (ingress).

00 Axial centre; On the central frame (juncture).

4p Gal.S.Pole; A king’s grail (water, juncture) and hand (limb-joint). In star lore, Grail is Crater, at 11p opposite 4p.

11p Gal.Pole; King Solomon’s hand (limb-joint). And his Temple model (juncture).

Midsummer; A king’s jaw (limb-joint).

Midwinter; A king’s jaw (limb-joint).

The ‘solstice’ axle is on the horizontal plane, on axis 7-15, analogous to Sagittarius-Gemini, implying ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Pisces, confirmed by the top central position of type 4 or Pisces as shepherd.

Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

Some of the ancestors of Christ are also embodied by a row or gallery of statues of Kings of Judah on a façade at Notre Dame de Paris.

The floor plan of Paris Notre Dame cathedral is oriented 25 degrees south-east, to sunrise on two feast days, and perhaps to the heliacal rising of the brightest star, Sirius, south of Gemini. The floor axis bends slightly northward in the eastern half, perhaps necessitated by foundation remnants of the previous St Etienne cathedral under the eastern half, or by astronomical alignment to a St Mary date, or by restoration. This orientation defect apparently does not affect the two subconscious axial grids (see below).

Archetype in Paris Notre Dame Choir or east floor plan

Paris Notre Dame cathedral stands on City Island, forming a natural and intuitive ‘womb’, ritualised by the site of several pagan temples. The first Gaul settlement in the area was on City Island, a kind of ‘womb’ of Paris. St Denis (see 10 and 11 below) and two companions lived on the river island when Roman Lutetia, ‘Muddy’, was on higher ground on the south bank. The island also once hosted Salt Hospital with a maternity ward (womb), and a prison for 300 prostitutes (‘womb’), as part of the subconscious expression of the Paris axis 11 Womb, the global features of which include ‘womb, interior, tomb, law, and/or library’. The island also had a gunpowder (war) factory, expressing part of the type 12 heart axis over the north-west end of the island, and a mental hospital. The island also hosts the Palace of Justice (law), subconsciously expressing one of the frequently recurrent features of type 11 Womb. The feature ‘law’ also finds expression in the classical icon of Justice as a woman, and in Tarot trump 11, Justice (Stoneprint Journal 4; London stoneprint tour. Several London courts are on its type 11 axes).

The floor plan of Paris Notre Dame is oriented to two feast days, and to Sirius. This orientation is paralleled and thus duplicated in the later Louvre Museum building renovations and in the Champs Elysees. The floor axis bends slightly northward in the eastern half, perhaps necessitated by foundation remnants of the previous St Etienne cathedral under the eastern half, or by astronomical alignment to a St Mary date, or by restoration. This orientation defect apparently does not affect the subconscious axial grid. St Etienne is linked to St Mary in another Paris site, St Etienne du Mont, dedicated to Mary, later to John, holding relics of Ste Genevieve, ‘Kin-wife’, co-patron of Paris with St Denis. She is linked to Guinevere, whose relics were paraded to Notre Dame Paris to cure ergot disease from mites on crops. ‘Crops’ is one of the archetypal features of type 11 Womb, finding expression in the icon of a wheat ear for the brightest star in constellations Virgo, Spica, ‘Corn ear’. Ste Genevieve in legend was ‘adopted’ by the Roman Luteita, ‘Muddy’.

The orientation of the floor plan of Notre Dame Paris bends slightly northward in the eastern half, perhaps necessitated by foundation remnants of the previous St Etienne cathedral under the eastern half, or by astronomical alignment to a St Mary date, or by restoration. This orientation defect apparently does not affect the two subconscious axial grids. In addition to its own stoneprint, Paris Notre Dame also expresses type 11 Womb in the much larger Paris stoneprint (Stoneprint Journal 3, Lulu.com).

Many cathedral side chapels have huge oil paintings named ‘Mays’, donated with traditional decorated trees or poems in jewelled boxes on May Days. Many were hidden or destroyed in the 1793 Revolution. Craft guilds dissociated from Church and royalty, some disguised as Rosicrucians. The Restoration distributed remaining Mays paintings to museums, and thirteen to Notre Dame. These include Descent of the Holy Spirit, by Blanchard; Sons of Sceva defeated by a demon, by Elyas; St Andrew’s torture, by Blanchard.

Features of the nine secondary patrons of France include St Denis, St Martin of Tours, St Louis, St Michael, St Remi, Ste Petronilla, St Radegund, Ste Therese of Lisieux, and Ste Joan of Arc.

Tombs include Geoffrey II, son of king Henry II of England; Queen Isabelle of France, wife of Phillip II. Here is the list of the Paris Notre Dame floor plan eastern or choir characters, by their sequence on the usual axial grid, in archetypal sequence (noting some of their archetypal features in brackets. This section is a draft for a forthcoming Stoneprint Journal edition, with … gaps to be completed).

Paris Notre Dame floor plan eastern or Choir characters and features, by their sequence on the subconscious axial grid, in archetypal sequence (noting some of their archetypal features in brackets).

Type Label; Character (some archetypal features):

01 Builder; St Denis, who lived on City Island, now Notre Dame site (build). Executed by beheading, but carried his head (twist) to his gravesite, marked by a woman, or Ste Genevieve, with a chapel (build), later an abbey, later a basilica and royal tomb, later Saint-Denis city (cluster), now a suburb of Paris. French patron (hero). One of Fourteen Holy Helpers (cluster). Patron of Paris with Ste Genevieve.

And cathedral Treasury (cluster, tower), sacked in Revolution (ruin).

02 Builder; Tomb of Sibour (hero…

Type 2c Basket expressions in Paris Notre Dame cathedral Choir, include the tomb (container) of Lt-Gen Harcourt, of a Norman family, trying to unwrap (weave) himself, named Marriage Reunion; and a Visitation; and tomb ofUrsins; and St William; and St Magdalene (priestess, of 2) holding ointment (instrument), probably spikenard, jar (container) or red egg (eclipse).

02c Basket; Tomb (container) of Lt-Gen Harcourt, d1769, of a Norman family. An angel (arm-link) with a torch opens the lid (container), Harcourt tries to unwrap (weave) himself to grasp the hand of his wife kneeling at his arms (weapon), as Marriage Reunion, Death skeleton holds an hourglass (instrument).

And Visitation…

And tomb (container) of Ursins, ‘Bears’…

And St William…

And St Magdalene (priestess, of 2) holding ointment (instrument), probably spikenard, jar (container) or red egg (eclipse) for kings (throne). She is often shown repentant, on one knee (twist 2), weeping (rain 2), or in Sainte Baume, Holy Balm cave (container), or with Magdalene and Mary (queens, of 3) or eight women (cluster 2), taking myrrh to Christ’ tomb (container, secret), finding the stone rolled open (reveal), with a red egg, hairy (weave), with an open book (reveal), of three aspects (polar trio); sinner at Magdala (tower of 2); repentant and converted (transition) disciple at Bethany; and witness, apostle, emigrant queen (of 3). Trios in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, continue pagan polar trios. Three Allat, daughters of Allah, indicate a female Holy Ghost. In Varagine’s Golden Legend, Magdalene marries John Evangelist and moves to France with her brother Lazarus and others. C-types are off the grid, but between specific axes.

03 Queen; St George v dragon (dragon, long neck, sacrifice).

And tomb of Darboy…

04 King; King Louis XIII (king, ‘sun’), kneels (squat), offers crown and sceptre to Mary, flanked by Louis XIV (twins).

05a Priest; Louis XIV kneels toward Mary (,,,,colours, priest, hyperactive, tailcoat head, assembly, horizontal, water, heart, large, bovid, reptile, winged, invert, weapon, sash, judge, felid of 13 opposite, equid).

05b Priest; High altar (priest, assembly, large,…

And heart (13v5) of Louise of Savoy, mother of Francis I, formerly under a copper tomb (13v5).

And sculpture of Pieta, Mary with Christ’s body (horizontal, death of 13v5).

05c Tail; Tomb of canon (priest 5) and poet (weave) De Belloy.

And St Marcel, Paris bishop (priest 5) of 300s. He killed a Seine river (water 5) snake (tail, reptile 5) by sceptre and wine (container, ritual 5).

And tomb of De Quellen ,,,,,, (,,,,,weave, tail, container, tree/herb, reveal, maze, disc).

And St Louis, King Louis IX, crusader (war, of 13v5), built Sainte Chapel for Christ’s relicss (container), died (sacrifice, of 6) in Tunisia. Generous to the poor, devout, humble, the only sainted French king.

06 Exile; Tomb of De Noailles…

07 Child; St Germain, a ‘son’ (juvenile) of St Vincent De Paul, like St Sulpice (doubled, 15v7). Or Ste Germaine, young (juvenile), stole bread in her apron (bag) for a beggar.

And Tomb of De Juines…

08 Healer; St Ferdinand…

And tomb of Beaumont…

Paris Notre Dame Red Door expresses type 9 Healer in the Choir or northern half stoneprint.

09 Healer; Red Door (disc) chapel, stone relief of coronation (disc) of … by an angel (bent forward,

09c Lid; Chapel…

And St Martin…

10 Teacher; Door of St Denis. Executed by beheading on Montmartre, Hill of Mercury (market) and Mars, but carried his head (arms up. Beheading is more typical of type 7). The oriflamme on the French banner (staff) was consecrated on his tomb. Patron of Paris with Ste Genevieve.

And North Window…

11 Womb; Statue of St Denis, on the floor (interior). He lived on the river island (water). He carried his head to his gravesite, marked by a woman (womb) with a chapel (interior),  later St Denis Basilica, vault (tomb) for kings. King Chilperic I buried his mother dowager, Queen Aregunda, at St Denis. He is patron of Paris with Ste Genevieve.

12 Heart; Modern Altar… central (interior)…

13 Heart; Mary and Christ child of Judah (lion, felid), holding a ball (rounded) at his chest (heart). On the floor (interior).

13c Head; Joan of Arc, one of nine minor patrons of France…

And St Therese of Avila, her emblems a heart (heart), arrow (weapon), book.

And Door of St Etienne…. The previous cathedral on this site was dedicated to St Etienne, is remains now beneath Notre Dame Paris west half.

And South Window…

And south tower and staircase spiral (container, maze) and dome (disc).

And chapel…

14 Mixer; Sacristy… far from the axial centre (egress).

15 Maker; Treasury (sceptre….

And tomb of Affre…

15g Gal.Gate; Treasury buttress (juncture).

00 Axial centre; Unmarked as usual, on the central axis (juncture).

4p Gal.S.Pole; Pillar (juncture) between altar Louis XIII.

And Six bronze angels with instruments of Christ’s Passion, at six pillars.

And Holy Sacrament (‘juncture’) chapel.

And Knights of Holy Sepulchre (tomb, of 13 opposite 5) of Christ, with fresco of Mary and St Nicaise, former patron of this chapel; and Crown (king, of 4) of Thorns. Atop this altar is St Mary of Seven Sorrows, holding Christ’s nails (juncture) and crown (king, of 4).

11p Gal.Pole; North Choir balustrade (juncture).

Midsummer; Central right third pillar (juncture).

Midwinter; Central left sixth pillar (juncture).

Midsummer is on the east-west latitude, on an axis between Leo and Cancer, implying ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus-Aries, confirmed by the prominent position of type 2c St Magdalene among major saints and kings in the ,,,,ambulatory or eastern ‘head’.

Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

Archetype in Paris Notre Dame Nave or west floor plan

The Paris Notre Dame nave or west floor plan expresses another stoneprint, linked or ‘geared’ to the choir or east stoneprint, by sharing three points. One of these shared features express the same type, and two express adjacent types: choir v nave 11v12, 13v13, 13cV14. Linked or doubled mindprints in art, or stoneprints in buildings or built sites, always contra-‘rotate’, meaning that their sequences run in opposite directions.

The Stations of the Cross artworks here, probably express yet another cycle, probably including some overlaps with the statues imprint, as they do in many cathedrals (Stoneprint Journal 6; Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour). Here is a list of the main characters in the Paris Notre Dame nave or western half stoneprint (noting some of their archetypal features in brackets. This section is also a draft for a forthcoming Stoneprint Journal edition, with … gaps to be completed).

Paris Notre Dame Nave or west floor plan expresses another stoneprint, linked or ‘geared’ to the Choir or east stoneprint, by sharing three points. Linked or doubled mindprints in art, or stoneprints in buildings or built sites, always contra-‘rotate’. Here are the main characters in the cathedral (noting some of their archetypal features, due to subconscious inspiration and the inherent structure in nature and culture).

Type Label; Character (archetypal features):

01 Builder; Predicateur…

02 Builder; …

02c Basket; …

03 Queen; Christ (sacrifice, bent neck)…

04 KingA; South-west tower…

04 KingB; Portal of St Anne, ‘Favour, Grace’. Of miners (juncture, of 4p), of sailors v storms, of women, of cabinet-makers (rectangle 4). House of David (king). Childless, like Hannah who bore Samuel. Hannah in the Quran saw a bird (4) feeding its young. Married  thrice (polar, of 4p), to Joachim, Clopas, Solomas, bore three daughters; Mary, Mary of Clopas, Mary Salomae, from Holy Spirit (polar trio, of 4p. After Weigel). Sister of Sobe (‘twins’), who was mother of Elizabeth who bore John Baptist, similar to Christ (‘twins’). Her emblem is a door (rectangle. juncture, of 4p). Of Immaculate Conception, described in Rev12;1 as “a great sign in the sky, a woman clothed with sun (sun)… crown (king) of twelve stars.”

05a Priest; Portal Last Judgement (judge, assembly, weapon) with angels (winged).

And West Rose window, central is Christ of Apocalypse (judge), sword (weapon, of 13v5) of truth from his mouth (jaw, an alternate type 4p), stars shining on his wounded hand. Over 16 prophets, centred around Ezekiel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, carrying evangelists (priests) Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

And Paris zero point in Notre Dame catheral’s square (assembly). Formerly, here stood a pre-Roman pillar (9) attached to a pagan statue holding a book (2), with a serpent (reptile), until the square was enlarged in 1748. The pagan statue was nicknamed Gray Man, later Master Stone, of alchemy and masonry. Perhaps Hercules (5), or Asclepius of medicine (heal 9), or Guillaume [William] of Paris, or Ste Genevieve, or Terminus, Roman god of boundary stones and journey ends, or Mercury of travel and trade, or Hermes Thrise Great. A fountain (4p or 5) was added next to it in 1625, and the statue was inscribed: “Approach if you are transformed (14), and if my waters are not enough, go to the temple, and the goddess [perhaps Cybele of Maia] you invoke, will prepare eternal (time, of 14) waters for you.” The statue was also named Faster, or Seller of Fasts, promoting fasting and praying (priest) as a way to holy water (5). An anti-Royalist satirical pamphlet of 1649, against young king Louis XIV in cahoots with corrupt Cardinal Mazarin, was titled “An Oracle by the Faster of Notre-Dame”, listing remedies to ‘cure’ France of cardinals and kings. The pagan statue was replaced by the triangular marker with the emblem of Notre Dame. In the Austrian succession war, this became the zero point for measuring distances to military camps along milestones every 2km.

05b Priest; Portal St Mary (,,,, priest, hyperactive, tailcoat head, assembly, horizontal, water, heart, large, bovid, reptile, winged, invert, weapon, sash, judge, felid of 13 opposite, equid).

And rose window of St Mary’s life, with zodiac and months labours (hyper-active, assembly).

05c Tail; North-west tower with staircase spiral (container, maze) and dome (disc).

06 ExileA; …

06 ExileB; Baptismal Font (U-shape), water as spirit (transform). The ritual is more typical of type 5.

07 Child; St Charles…

07g Gal.Centre; St Enfant (juvenile of 7)…

08 Healer; St Vincent de Paul, of charity. His emblems include children (juvenile, of 7). Pirates sold him to a doctor (heal) who was invited to Istanbul but died en route, so Vincent was again sold to an ex Franciscan priest of Nice, who had converted to Islam to live on a mountain with three wives. Vincent converted the second wife and escaped. Louis XIIIs Queen Anne made him spiritual adviser.

09 Healer; St Xavier or Sevier, emblems of crucifix (‘pillar’), bell (metal), vessel, crab. Missionary (reveal), Apostle of Indies, Indonesia, China, Japan. Basque noble. Athlete (strong), high-jumper (bent). Kissed an ulcer of a patient in Venice (heal). Visions (trance) of his future, his sister’s prophecy. Lifted a sick man who dies after communion but freed from fever (heal). Cured (heal) a man of sores. Resuscitated (cure) a boy in a well at Cape Comorin, a man buried at Coulao, and a boy about to be buried at Multao, and a child. Kneeled (bent forward) to cure (heal) a child on his shoulders. Cured (heal) a dumb and paralytic man in Amanguchi, and a deaf Japanese person. Levitated (trance) giving communion. One arm’s bones in Rome, one arm-bone (raised arms, of 10/9c) in Macau, moved several times. 1940s Spain feast of Javierada, annual day pilgrimage from Pamplona to St Xavier, restored family castle (pillars).

10 Teacher; Tomb of Landry…

11 WombA; St Clotilde (womb…

And tomb (11) of Yver, Canon of Paris and Rouen to 1467, crippled by gout, appointing Canon Duquesnay to vote for him in electing an archbishop for Rouen, with 43 priests, archdeacons, canons.

11 WombB; Cloister Door (interior…

12 Heart; Statue of St Denis, on the floor (interior). He was beheaded (death) by sword (weapon) on Montmartre, Hill of Mercury and Mars (war), but carried his head (‘heart’, ‘invert’). Where he stopped, became St Denis Basilica, later vault (tomb) for kings. Rebuilt by abbot Fulrad, who helped Carolingians to take the Merovingian throne (invert).

13 Heart; Christ child of Judah (lion, felid), holding a ball (rounded) at his chest (heart), held by St Mary, on the floor (interior).

13c Basket Head; (oracle, head, hat, lid, weave, tree, tail).

14 MixerA; South door… and window…, far from the axial centre (egress).

14 MixerB; …

14-15; St Anne, Mary’s mother…

And Conversion (transform, of 14) of St Paul (maker? Of 15) painting by La Hyre, 1637.

15 Maker; St Peter, ‘Rock’, Church founder (maker), keys holder at crossroads (gate, of 15g) as Janus (doubled), keys as sceptres (sceptre), formerly Isis or Hecate of crossroads, or Mithras, ‘Friend’, of doorways (15g), as Eden angels (winged, double). A ‘May’ painting by La Hyre in Paris Notre Dame shows St Peter curing sick with his shade (double). His emblems are a boat, rooster, pallium, book (order), beard. Namesakes Cephas, rival of John Baptist, and Simon Peter, fishers by net (bag). Companion (double) of Mark. Apostle to Jews, another (doubled) to gentiles. Denied Christ three times, last to abandon Christ, threw verbal ‘stones’ at Him. With a sword (‘sceptre’)(Joh18:10) as sun priest (midsummer), sword in ‘stone’. Appointed to administer divine law (order) as feathers (‘sceptres’, more typical of 10), “What you bind or loose (rope) on earth shall be bound or loosed in heaven (doubled)”.

15g Gal.Gate; St Joseph…, often with Christ child (juvenile of 7v15), rod (sceptre of 15), plane, carpentry square (build, of 1).

Paris Notre Dame Ste Genevieve expresses type 15g or type -1 in the Nave or western floor plan. She is a Paris patron, who saved the city from Attila’s Huns by mass prayer miracles. Her emblems are a lit candle, bread, keys (gate, of 15g), herd (cluster, of 1), or cattle (bovid, of 1).

15g -1; Ste Genevieve, ‘Kin-wife’ or sister, priestess (2), Paris patron, who saved the city from Attila’s Huns by mass prayer miracles in the 400s, as shown in her stained glass window. Atilla marched to Orleans instead. Her emblems are a lit candle, bread, keys (gate, of 15g), herd (cluster, of 1), cattle (bovid, of 1). She resembles Simeon Stylites on his pillar (tower, of 1). Converted by Lupus (canid, of 15) of Troyes. Took grain to Troyes. Bargained with conquerors ChildericII and ClovisI for prisoners, as shown in her painted window. Memorialised by St Clotilde (double). Her godmother was Lutetia, ‘Muddy’ (build, of 1), former name of Paris. Visions of saints, angels (winged), prophecies (priestess, of 2). Enemies conspired to drown her in a fire lake. She led a movement of nuns. Clovis I built (build, of 1) St Etienne du Mont abbey for her, later Ste Genevieve du Mont /St Etienne, where her tomb worked miracles. Plundered (ruin) by Vikings in 847, partially rebuilt (build, of 1), later replaced by a church that Revolutinaries made into the Pantheon tomb of leaders, restored 1821, secularised as tomb, restored 1852 (build /ruin, or 1), now religious and secular (doubled, of 15). Her relics procession stopped wheat ergot ‘burn’, but were burnt at Place de Grève in the Revolution. Her order united (doubled, of 15) with the Miramiones of Holy Trinity, semi-secular (doubled, of 15), now Sisters of the Holy Family.

00 Axial centre; Unmarked, as usual.

04p Gal.S.Pole; West wall pilaster C (juncture).

11p Gal.Pole; North interior pillar right B (juncture).

Midsummer; West interior pillar inner right G (juncture).

Midwinter; West interior pillar outer left D (juncture).

The ‘solstice’ axle is on a north-south meridian. These markers place summer between axes 14-15, analogous to Cancer-Gemini, implying ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Aries-Pisces, confirmed by the prominence of type 4 or Pisces as one of the three main portals.

Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

  • See a post on archetypes in Rennes le Chateau church in a post on http://www.stoneprintjournal.wordpress.com or order Stoneprint Journal 6; Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour, including a virtual tour of the Bains and Rennes landscapes, Joyeuse Castle, and Rennes artworks, on Lulu.com
  • See 200 demonstrations of structuralist analyses of the subconscious expression of archetypal character features, sequence, axial grid, and time-frames, in religious, spiritual, ‘fine’, and rock paintings, engravings and other media, and the scientific context of structuralist anthropology, psychology and art history, in the book Mindprint (2014, Edmond Furter. Lulu.com).
  • Some editions of Stoneprint Journal are also available on Lulu.com.

Some sources

Allen, RH. 1899 Star names and their meanings. Lost Library, Glastonbury

De Santillana G, Von Deschend H. 1969 Hamlet’s Mill: An essay on myth and the frame of time. Boston: Gambit

Eco, Umberto. 2009 Infinity of lists. Rizzoli

Fulcanelli. Le Mystere des Cathedrales, translated by Mary Sworder

Furter, E. 2014 a. Mindprint, the subconscious art code. Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2014 b. More examples of structuralist art analysis; www.mindprintart.wordpress.com

Furter, E. 2015 a. Gobekli Tepe, between rock art and art. Expression 9, p21-25. Atelier Etno, Italy. Also in Expression book Rock art: Where, When, Why, to Whom, 2015 Nov

Furter, E. 2015 b. Art is structural magic, not illustration. Expression 10, p15-21, Dec. Atelier Etno, Italy

Furter, E. 2015 d. Structuralist rock art analysis. Association of Southern African Professional Archaeologists, ASAPA. In press 2019, University of Zimbabwe, Harare

Furter, E. 2015 e. Mindprint in mushroom, psiclocybin, peyote, mescalin, sugar, and chocolate art. http://www.mindprintart.wordpress.com

Furter, E. 2016 a. Abstract signs in art are shorthand for cultural structure. Expression 13, p42-53. Ed. Anati, E. Atelier Etno, Italy. Also in Anati, E; Meaning of abstract signs.

Furter, E. 2016 b. Colonial artists re-style the same characters. Expression 14, p38-47. Atelier Etno, Italy

Furter, E. 2016 c. Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities. Four Equators Media, Johannesburg

Furter, E. 2017 a. Pregnant is the most consistent typological gender. Expression 15, p19-24, Atelier Etno, Italy

Furter, E. 2017 b. Stoneprint Journal 1; Pictish beasts ‘zodiac’. July. Four Equators Media, Johannesburg

Furter, E. 2017 c. Stoneprint Journal 2; Crop circles are natural artworks. Four Equators Media, Johannesburg

Furter, E. 2017 d. Recurrent characters in rock art reveal objective meaning. Expression 16, June, p54-62. The message behind the image. Atelier Etno, Italy. Also in Expression book 25, 2019

Furter, E. 2018 a. Stoneprint Journal 3; Paris stoneprint tour. Four Equators Media, Johannesburg

Furter, E. 2018 b. Stoneprint Journal 4; London stoneprint tour. Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2018 c. Stoneprint Journal 5; Culture code in seals and ring stamps. Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2019 a. Stoneprint Journal 6; Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour. Lulu.com

Gilbert, Adrian. 2002 New Jerusalem. Corgi

Jung, CG. 1912, 1952 Symbols of Transformation; IN Collected Works Vol 5, transl R Hull, ed. Herbert Reed, M Fordham, G Adler; ed, McGuire. Bollingen Series XX, 20 volumes; Routledge

Jung, CG. 1934, 1954 Archetypes of the collective unconscious. CW

Jung, CG. 1950 Synchronicity; an a-causal connecting principle, treatise

Leeuw, G van de. 1938 Religion in Essence and Manifestation

Neugebauer, Otto; and R Parker. 1969 Egyptian astronomical texts 3; Decans, planets, constellations and zodiacs. Brown Univ

Winzen, D. 2012. David, prototype of Christ. Living Bulwark.

Wylie, Alison. 1989 Archaeological cables and tacking: the implications of practice for Bernstein’s options, beyond objectivism and relativism. Phil of Social Sciences 19, n1, March

Categories
Subconscious archetype structuralist anthropology model

Blueprint, the subconscious structure in cultural media

Abstract. Culture is rooted more deeply than analogy, symbolism, experience, or any conscious impulse. The archetypal structuralist model of an axial grid of typology, raises individual and social subconscious behaviour to conscious appreciation; and challenges the paradigm of cumulative conscious constructs. The core content of culture is a set of specific recurrent features, hard-wired into nature and subconscious behaviour; measurable and predictive in artworks, built sites and alphabets worldwide; and testable against about 100 details of an inter-dependent structure of five layers. The archetypal model includes twelve to sixteen character types (each with specific optional features, at specific average frequencies); their sequence; an axial grid between the eyes or focal points of specific pairs of opposites; five central area limb-joints or junctures; and the seasonal time-frame of the artist’s culture. Structuralist anthropology is a viable science, despite its recent detour into animism and perspectivism. Structuralism offers social perspective and therapy to the current age of global migration, population, socio-economic and environmental shock, perceived as ‘culture’ shock.

KEYWORDS: archetype, art, axial grid, built sites, expression, structuralist anthropology, subconscious.

By Edmond Furter. Independent structuralist anthropologist, author of Mindprint (2014) and of Stoneprint (2016). Edmondfurter@gmail.com

  1. Introduction

Anthropologists and their informants seemed to share the paradigm of culture as a cumulative, conscious system or construct. Terence Turner (2009) cited ‘ethnographic evidence for significant, fundamental features of conceptual construction, and meaning of specific categories and propositions, that differentiate Amazonian societies [from one another], and from Modernist ideas.” In this paradigm, no idealist model could account for variations among cultural systems. But some myths indicate an archetypal paradigm, and several media express universal structure. Primordial animals and ancestors hold prototype objects, “self-existing, self-objectifying things and behaviours, found, appropriated, never made. People copied these.” (Turner 2009). Post-structuralism sought a midway to escape the impasse of nature v culture dualism: “Humans produce, or regulate in culturally standardized ways, internal bodily processes of transformation, that give rise to aspects of social personhood. Such products, either artefacts or conceptual knowledge, cannot be simple, internally homogeneous classes, or in a semiotic order of signification, or ethno-scientific taxonomy; but complex schemas of heterogeneous elements and levels of features, comprising transformational steps in a process of mediating relatively natural to cultural forms.” (Turner 2009). The present study demonstrates the complex schema (Furter 2014), but it is clearly innate and natural. The central question of What is human, now finds and answer in structuralist anthropology: We replicate natural structure and meaning, but appropriate it as ‘products’ of our faculties.

1.2. Structuralist failures

Structuralist anthropology had failed to demonstrate specific invariable principles, processes or patterns in cultural behaviour or artefacts; beyond ritualisation of obvious natural structures such as kinship. The field had found only apparently arbitrary details in myths, cosmologies and other crafts; and failed to isolate any comprehensive abstract structure. The ideal of formulating behaviour, as in economics, linguistics, semiotics and psychology, may seem to reduce culture to innate perception of natural categories and meaning; yet formulas grant access to subconscious social processes; reveal our place in nature, and thus answer the central question of human sciences, as Turner (2009) noted. But Claude Levi-Strauss was “the last major anthropologist to focus on that question”. Turner noted fundamental flaws in raising any cultural duality, such as nature v culture, to the level of a paradigm; and applying a rigorous model to apparently ‘fluid’ data. But several ‘splinters’ in cultural functions remained ‘beams’ in scientific paradigms. Viveiros de Castro (1998) had identified “implicit philosophy in interpretation” as requiring a ‘bomb’ to breach. Animists and Perspectivists magnified the dualist flaw into multi-culturalism, reducing nature to culture, thus repeating the Aristotelian error of allowing logic to override observation. Human sciences struggled to find the ghost in behaviour, despite the success of structuralism in natural sciences.

1.2.1 Society disrupted science

Anthropology is “an effort to understand human nature through systematic study of qualities in us, that vary in time and place, and those that don’t…” noted Peter Wood (2015). But Wood immediately recognised the dominant evolutionary and diffusionist paradigm; “…and how we emerged as a species, diversified into thousands of languages, tribes, and civilizations.” Despite “steadfast determination to stand outside the myths people tell themselves, to see things as they really are,” social anthropology had “learned the trick of promoting new myths in the name of de-mythologizing.” This failure of anthropology applied to all human sciences; inability to rise above socio-political agendas, such as rationalisations of colonialism, egalitarianism, social guilt, nostalgia, ideologies, and vague institutional agendas such as ‘curation’ and ‘education’. All the conscious and subconscious uses and abuses of culture remain scientific baggage. Anthropology remained partly untested popular philosophy, an extension of cultural crafts, as in divinity or art history training.

Structuralism, also named Ecological or Symbolic, was also distracted by social anthropology applications, labelled Political Economy, Ideology, or Cultural Construction of self v other; including some simplistic data, pragmatic interpretations and populism (Endicott et al 2005). Science had never studied cultural crafts sufficiently to inform practitioners or users at a paradigmatic level, despite the example of the successes of popular psychology. Culture consumes anthropology on its own terms; as critique of Modern Western thought and society, or as the supposed voice of ‘pure, primitive’ cultures.

1.3 Structuralist successes

Structuralist anthropology did influence human sciences and technologies, but under other labels, such as animism. A minor structuralist revival in the 2000s applied behavioural algorithms to data collection and interpretation, prompted by computer automation. One journal editor had declined a draft of this paper because the author was “the only structuralist anthropologist left”. But Turner (2009) had demonstrated transformed structuralism in supposedly post-structuralist and deconstructionist models. Levi-Strauss’ (1955) “Mathematics of man” had added impetus to cybernetics, information technology, machine interface, and artificial intelligence (AI), now one of the main fields of science and technology. His search for the machine in the ghost of culture was partly product of, and partly a prod to automation. Reconstructions of geared layers of the Antikythera device from a BC shipwreck, and Chinese clock towers, are reminders that our innate impulse to automate nature into logic, is timeless. George Boole (1854) had abstracted some behaviours into mathematical formulae using binary quantities, 1 and 0, as functions of And, Or, or Not. His book, Laws of thought, inspired programmers a century later. Structuralism may resemble a time-bomb, but it is alive in all sciences and crafts. Godel in Vienna, competing with Russel in England, found that logic applied to sets; could be consistent or complete; but not both. This paper describes five layers of structure, each consistent with itself (isolated from 700 examples), each with sets of optional features. In WWII, Alan Turing came across an Italian engineer’s description of a lecture on the failed Difference Engine of mathematician Charles Babbage, interpolated by Babbage’s student, Ada Lovelave, estranged daughter of Lord Byron. Ada was inspired by the Spinning Jenny and Jacquard’s punch-card looms, to propose extending automation beyond numbers. Babbage soon designed the Analytical Engine, but lost parliamentary funding. Turing mechanised letter code permutations in an electro-mechanical Universal Machine, nicknamed ‘The Bomb’ for Allied intelligence at Bletchley Park, to crack German Enigma codes. His colleagues built the Colossus machine on Boolean logic, to crack German Loren codes. A year after WWII, a science fiction magazine story imagined a world-wide web. Turing had noted in his book in 1950 that it was impossible to predict which problems a computer could solve; and that some logical solutions would remain improvable. He also predicted artificial intelligence, provided that rules of behaviour could be isolated. This idea was controversial, and is likely to remain so even after the discovery of subconscious behaviour (Furter 2014, 2016). Bletchley Park work was classified until the 1970s, but soon influenced some civil applications. Binary code, Nasa’s moon missions, magnetic tape, Xerox windows, Steve Wozniac’s Apple, and circuit miniaturisation all required user-friendly interfaces. Hard sciences technologised natural structure despite lacking theories, or ‘Shut up and calculate’ in the post-war tech axiom. The web was realised sixty years after the war, when Vint Cerf’s integration of defence and civil security agency radio and electronic networks escaped via academia into the corporate world in about 2000. Within a decade it was the largest and potentially most integrative and democratic artefact ever made.

Big budget science and tech banks on unravelling natural structure, as in the Large Hadron Collider, and in serving innate behaviour with animist applications such as ‘social media’. Structuralist anthropology seemed political, un-falsifiable, and incapable of breaking cultural or natural codes, but practitioners had misunderstood and abandoned it.

1.3.1 Synthesis requires structure

Turner (2009) proposed that natural-cultural structure resided in transformations, such as maturity cycles. Ironically, this development itself signified a phase in scientific maturity. Physical sciences co-operate to infer invisible structures in nature, such as bio-chemistry and physics; enabling applications in social crafts, such as health care and environmental management. Human sciences have access to massive data from the cultural record, including Google algorithms, but lag behind in theory, interpretation and applications, despite several efforts at synthesis, as by Talcott Parsons (Hays 1958). The humanities shy away from studying some core content of cultural behaviour, such as spiritual crafts, in any universal or comprehensive context. Education and training serve cultural crafts mainly by perpetuating media praxis, such as art, divinity and literature; in local, temporal, and political contexts. The net result of specialisation and occupational praxis is a post-modernist lack of context, and an unexamined general scientific paradigm.

Cultural qualities tend to relate to categories of natural, social and economic values (as Max Weber had recognised); such as species, elements, organs, functions and tools. Even apparently simplistic features such as ‘bag, weapon, or mixing’, have inherent meanings and abstractions that enable ‘grammar’ in perception, thus inviting structuralist study of perception, within consciousness levels, human nature, physical nature, and ultimately principles of matter and energy. Thus culture may offer as much access to immutable laws, or archetype as a self-calibrating standard, unaffected by place and time; as nature does. Jung and Jaffe (1965) had noted: “Again and again I encounter the mistaken notion that an archetype is determined [by cultural influences or experience] in regard to its content… It is necessary to point out once more that archetypes are… determined only as regards their form, and then only to a very limited degree.” This study indicates that even ‘forms’ (such as major gods, in Jung’s example), are global, thus natural, and not ‘culturally determined’ either. Even average numbers of selections of optional character features are global (see frequencies in Table I and the graphs).

Some archetypal themes are conventionalised (such as the creative vortex or churn, in the Hindu and rock art examples below; or healing trance rituals in San, Siberian, and other polities). Typology now emerges as the once elusive recurrent “motifs in the jet-stream of time.” (De Santillana 1969). Demonstrations of recurrent behaviour (see Data sources below) now confirm that we have individual and collective compulsions to re-express the innate canon, algorithm, blueprint, or ‘grammar’ in all our media; as affirmation and therapy in the broadest sense of the term. Demonstration of inherent commonalities, and superficial differences, offers conscious context to subconscious behaviour that may be valuable in the era of dynamic global migration and supposed ‘culture’ shock. We are now more diverse than even the Sumerian, Indus, Persian, Hellenic, Roman or Colonial empires.

The archetypal model challenges paradigmatic assumptions about supposedly ‘liberal’ arts and culture as artefacts of ‘development’. The subconscious expression model is highly testable. Universality of language and architecture validates testing of features of grammar or architecture; but invalidates the nurture model. Innate language capacity does require some transfusion, thus language is a multi-generational artefact. Likewise, transfusion could not sustain any cultural media without innate, natural, structuralist features in perception, ecological context, and in meaning itself (Furter 2017a). Any application of generic culture imposes its own layer of arbitrary elements or styling, for polity bonding, appropriation and exploitation. The thin layer of arbitrary features may likewise be subject to rigorous rules, a subject for further study. The present study offers a model to isolate, study, predict and automate the blueprint of subconscious and social behaviour.

1.3.2 Structuralist formulae and paradigms

James B Harrod (2018) demonstrates that an algebraic group-theory formula of Andre Weil was the format for Levi-Strauss’ kinship model, also applied to some aspects of ritual, artistic design, built site layout, and agriculture field layout. Levi-Strauss had formulated aspects of myth into aggregates, to extract various Functions (Fx, Fy), acting on Terms (a, b), relative to ( : ) other, swopped or substituted Functions and Terms; thus Fx(a):Fy(b) ~ Fx(b):Fa–1(y). ‘Deep structure’ as used by Levi-Strauss and Chomsky fell out of academic fashion, but the formula was revived and automated to reveal recurrent motifs in cultural and scientific texts. Harrod had earlier (1975) revised the Weil-Levi-Strauss formula to quantify myth as an unfolding process, instead of a structuralist analogy. Instead of Straussian opposites such as ‘a v a–1’ in an equation of ratios, Harrod proposed a set of transformations (>), demonstrated in qualities of self-awareness, in ‘animist’ mode. His Revised Canonical Formula (rCF) uses equations that are “asymmetric, non-linear, non-reversible, inverse by transformation”. He proposes “networks of semantic complementary binary opposites in cultural-value space”. He found “no universal application in the evolution and history of culture forms”, and concludes that culture and cognition ‘evolves in stages’, after the individual maturity model of conscious cognition. Yet he explained “creative imagination” as “not derived logically, [but] constrained or channelled by the formula.” The difference between ‘constraint’ and archetype could be a flimsy semantic veil, obscuring the large and testable semiotic structure in nature and culture (Furter 2017a).

  1. Blueprint in cultural media

The present study confirms that pairs of spatial opposites play some roles in archetypal expression, but challenges Harrod’s conclusions by expanding evidence of global application of a more concrete, less abstract, and more layered formula, with limited content.

2.1 Data sources

Data for Table I and the graphs, are from 265 artefacts, including 170 artworks and rock art works (Furter 2014); 45 built sites (Furter 2016); and 50 seals, including 25 ancient and 25 classical seals (Furter 2018c); all from a wide range of cultures and eras. A further 500 artworks (400 listed in Furter 2014) and 55 built sites confirm the five inter-dependent layers of structure. It is near impossible to find any artwork, built site, or cultural set with eleven or more characters, that does not express the standard structure, or doubled adjacent structure in cultural works with about 22 to 38 characters. Even semi-geometric shapes are kinds of characters (Furter 2015b).

2.1.1 The archetypal structuralist model

The five subconscious layers of expression are: (a) typological characters with specific optional features; (b) peripheral sequence, clockwise or anti-clockwise; (c) axial grid between eyes or focal points of pairs of opposites; (d) three pairs of polar junctures, implying three planes; (e) orientation of one polar pair vertical or horizontal to the ground-line or a cardinal direction, often indicating the seasonal time-frame of the artist’s culture.

Figure 1. Axial grid of the sixteen types (numbered 1 to 15, but repeating 5), and four transitional types (c-numbers), as they appear in artworks and building sites. Orientation, angles and radii differ in each work. Each character expresses some, never all of the cluster of features of its type.

Types could be labelled after any popular set. Generic labels, such as social functions used here, avoid the false impression of diffusion from any particular medium or culture. Zodiac seasons and decanal hour myth labels were used initially, requiring repeated clarification that they do not arise from conscious invention or diffusion. Correspondence theories are often misled by archetypal recurrent features, or by citation of parallel expressions among media and cultures; into assuming diffusion, and ignoring innate nature.

Numbering of the transitional c-types change in this paper, from 3c 6c 10c 14c in previous publications, to 2c 5c 9c 13c, for easier use of alphanumeric Sort functions in data. Their positions remain the same.

Recurrent behaviour subconsciously and rigorously follows several quirky rules. Type characters always have their eyes (except a womb at 11, and a heart at 12/13; or interior focal points in built sites), on the axial grid formed by pairs. Spatial elements in culture resemble cosmology, but both express archetype, and do not derive from one another. Cultural artefacts express two ‘galactic’ poles (4p, 11p); two galactic crossings (7g, 15g); an annual or Ecliptic Pole at the axial centre; and two ‘celestial’ poles (Cp and Csp) or midsummer and midwinter. Poles are not expressed by eyes, but limb joints (junctures in built sites). Four types could be double, as in Figure 1 (1v8 and 2v9; 5a v12 and 5b v13), or single (only 2v9 and 5v13); thus the total is usually sixteen or twelve. Some other pairs are doubled in complex artworks or built sites.

A shift in the position of two or three eyes could erase the sequence and the structure, but almost never does so. Axial grids are not inherent in any collection of about eleven to twenty items. Morley’s miracle (1899) applies only to the equilateral shape of an inner triangle, formed by the intersections of lines that trisect the corners of any irregular triangle into three equal parts. In axial grids, angles are irregularly unequal. Napoleon’s theorem applies only to some predictable properties of equilateral triangles, based on the edges of a triangle. Axial grids are not based on lines of equal length.

Table I. The minimal twelve type characters in any artwork, built site or craft set.

Label; known archetypal features with known global average frequencies:

1 /2 Builder; twist 44%, cluster 23%, bovid 19%, bird 19%, tower 18%, build 14%, sack 10%, hero 10%, book 8%, rain,

2c Basket; weave 25%, container20% instrument 20%, shoulder-hump 20%, hat 15%, snake 10%, throne 10%,

3 Queen; neck-bend 31%, dragon 19%, sacrifice 17%, queen 13%, school 12%, spring 10%, fish 6%, ovid 5%,

4 King; squat 30%, rectangle 28%, king  22%, twins 13%, sun 12%, bird 10%, fish 8%, furnace 8%, field 5%,

5a/5b Priest; varicoloured 37%, priest 34%, hyperactive 33%, tailcoat-head 32%, assembly 30%, horizontal 28%, water 24%, heart 24%, large 24%, bovid 20%, winged 14%, invert 12%, reptile 10%, sash 8%, equid, ascend,

5c Basket-Tail; weave 16%, tail 14%, U-shape 10%, contain 8%, herb 4%, oracle, spirit (ka), spheres,

6 Exile; in/out 58%, horned 44%, sacrifice 30%, small 14%, U-shape 13%, double-head 12%, caprid 8%,

7 Child; rope 24%, juvenile 24%, bag 22%, unfold 13%, beheaded 10%, chariot 8%, mace 6%, off-grid,

7g Galactic-Centre; limb- joint 38%; juncture 34% (throne, altar, spiral, tree, staff); path/gate 18%; water 16%,

8/9 Healer; bent 28%, strong 28%, pillar 28%, heal 22%, disc 14%, metal 8%, ritual 6%, canid 4%,

9c Basket-Lid; disc/hat/lid 27%, instrument 25%, reveal 16%, hump 15%, weave 8%,

10 Teacher; W-shape 44%, staff 36%, hunt master 24%, guard 20%, metal 14%, market 14%, disc 12%, council 11%, snake 8%, ecology 8%, school 6%, wheel 5%,

11 Womb; womb 88%, wheat 15%, water 14%, tomb 11%, interior 8%, library 8%, law 5%, felid 5%,

12/13 Heart; heart 83%, felid 42%, death 34%, rounded 21%, invert 14%, weapon 11%, war 9%, water-work 8%,

13c Basket-Head; oracle 14%, head 14%, weave 8%, ship,

14 Mixer; in/out 43%, time 28%, tree 20%, angel 15%, bird 11%, antelope 10%, dancer 8%, felid 8%, reptile 4%,

15 Maker; churn 44%, rope 28%, order 27%, rampant 26%, bag 20%, mace 16%, doubled 16%, face 12%, canid 12%, sceptre 11%, smite 8%, reptile 8%, winged 8%,

15g Galactic Gate; junct 30% (river 10%); limb-joint 12%.

Polar features (see the triangles in the centre of Figure 1) also follow universal average frequencies. The axial centre is usually unmarked at about 60%, or on a limb-joint or juncture, expressing both ends of a polar axle, and thus the projection angle.

4p Gal.S.Pole; mark 82%; limb-joint 67%; juncture 17% (spout 12%, stream, speech),

11p Gal. Pole; mark 88%; limb joint 64% (hand 12%, elbow 10%, foot 12%, etc); juncture 24% (door 12%, corner, etc),

Midsummer (cp); Limb-joint 54%, or juncture 24%.

Midwinter (csp); Limb-joint 46%, or juncture 24%.

One of the polar axles is on the horizontal plane 50%, or vertical plane 12% (or on a meridian or latitude on a built site). Polar markers usually place midsummer on or near type 12, 13, 14 or 15 (see Figure 1), implying spring and the cultural time-frame 90 degrees earlier (in seasonal terms), as Age Taurus1, Taurus2, Aries3 or Pisces4. Some recent works are framed in Age Aquarius5a, which started in 2016 (Furter 2014). The type hosting spring, 1, 2, 3 or 4, is often prominent. The general theme of a work is indicated by features shared among three or more characters. Works express about 60% of the optional, measurable, recurrent features.

Categories of the identified features are apparently inconsistent with conscious logic, indicating subconscious access to archetypal logic. Rigorous average frequencies, and consistency through millennia, also rule out learning, nurture or conscious revisions. The full repertoire appears in the oldest examples, about BC 26 000 (Furter 2014), ruling out accumulation of idiosyncratic ‘ideas’, and of localised cultural ‘frameworks’, as some cognitive archaeologists suggest for San art of the last millennium (Lewis-Williams and Pierce 2012).

2.2 Structuralist labelling

 

1Builder 2Builder 2cBasket 3Queen 4King 4p
8Healer 9Healer 9cLid 10Teacher 11Womb 11p

 

5aPriest 5bPriest 5cTail 6Exile 7Child 7g
12Heart 13Heart 13cHead 14Mixer 15Maker 15g

 

cp csp ? ? ?

Table II. Labels for marking typological features in cultural artefacts.

Labels are used in pairs of spatial opposites, here given above-below one another. Some pairs may remain unused; often the transitional c-types, or two of the four doubled types (1v8, 5a v12) may remain unexpressed in a work. Characters with eyes off the grid, without a limb-joint on a polar point are labelled ?. Numbering follows the horary (hours) sequence, also used in divination and emblems such as the Tarot trumps (Furter 2014), validated against atomic (proton) numbers in the periodic table (Furter 2016). Pairs of opposites are seven or eight numbers apart: 1v8, 2v9, 3v10, 4v11, 5a v12, 5b v13, 6v14, 7v15. Magnitudes are fifteen or sixteen numbers apart: 1:16, 2:17, 2c:17c, 3:18, 4:19, 5a:20, 5b:21, up to about 64, expressing base15 and base16, confirmed by chemical groups, and transition elements analogous to the four c-types. Proposed type numbers are probably archetypal.

2.2.1 Frequency graphs

Figure 2. Line graph of average frequencies (in percentages) of the seven most common features (see Table I) of each of the minimal twelve subconscious types and four border types (marked by thick vertical bars) in artworks and built sites.

The line graph could be traced in axial format (see the version of this paper on Researchgate.net), with direct spatial analogy to how artists use canvases, and how communities use built sites.

Adjacent combined or split types 1 /2, 5a/5b, 8/9 and 12/13, express the same features at nearly the same frequencies, thus they are combined in data, causing minor peaks in the graphs. These four may be differentiated into eight types in future. Frequencies peak around type 11p, with a secondary peak around type 4p opposite. Four of the highest frequency features have spatial elements (here marked by dotted lines), in addition to their sequence position: type 11 has her axis on her womb; type 12/13 has his axis on his heart; types 6 and 14 are notably ingressed to, or egressed from the centre of the artwork. Frequency ranks indicate some interplay between the typological or ‘ecliptic’ plane, and the frequency or ‘galactic’ plane. The time-frame or ‘celestial’ plane seems to affect only seasonal features.

3. Structured art ‘design’

Figure 3. Example of archetypal structure in religious art (Vishnu churn after the Mahabharata. Tracing after De Santillana 1969. Type labels and axial grid after Furter 2014). Ropes, churn, canines and doubling express the general theme of types 15 and 15g, re-creation and incarnation.

Table III. Typological characters in a Vishnu pillar drawing (noting archetypal features):

1 Builder; Ring instrument of Vishnu (twisted).

2 Builder; Vishnu (twisted), some features of flanking types (NO EYE).

2c Basket; Umbrella (lid), and flower (cluster), and king’s rattle (instrument). C-types are off the grid, in their sectors.

3 Queen; King with four heads (necks, dragon, spring).

4 King; King (king).

5 Priest; Priestess (ritual).

5c Basket-Tail; Snake tail (tail).

6 Exile; Turtle (reptile), at the centre (extreme ingress).

7 Child; Pony, multi-headed (unfolding, decapitated), with saddle (bag).

8 Healer; Puller (strong?) without rope.

9 Healer; Pot? (NO EYE).

9c Basket-Lid; Three pots, closed (lid).

10 Teacher; Lotus goddess (arms up, autumn, balance).

11 Womb; Dog midriff (womb).

13 Heart; Elephant chest (heart).

13c Basket-Head; Ship (ship, container, texture).

14 Mixer; Elephant person with snake heads (mix, energy), far out (egress).

15 Maker; Two (double) dogs (canine) on churn snake (rope). Some functions are at 1 /2.

15g Galactic Gate; Vishnu lower hand (limb-joint).

The axial centre is on the turtle head (perhaps neck in the original artwork; limb-joint?).

11p Galactic Pole; Bow (juncture).

Midsummer (cp); Turtle front upper claw (limb-joint), or on the churn base (juncture).

Midwinter (csp); King’s foot, or knee (limb-joint). These markers imply spring and the cultural time-frame as either Age Taurus2-Aries3 (about BC 1800), probably the perceived era of cultural formation; or Age Pisces4, contemporary with the work. The central top character as a spring marker indicates cosmological Age Taurus2, however most alchemical works express that time-frame.

The main general theme here is type 15 Maker, of ropes, churn, re-creation and canines. This theme appears worldwide. Another general theme in the work is type 10 Teacher; arms-up, staffs, balance.

De Santillana et al (1969) popularised ethnographic archaeo-astronomy in Hamlet’s mill, reading Icelandic and several corresponding cosmic motifs as diffused and degraded ‘astronomy’. They indicated the possibility of innate subconscious impulses, but argued for diffusion. Archaeo-astronomy still reads myth as coded astronomy or proto-science, and does not investigate the role of archetype, and thus nature, in culture, nor in scientific practice.

4 Structured rock art ‘design’

Figure 4. Example of archetypal structure in rock art (Zimbabwe, Matobo range, Nanke Cave. After Parry 2012. Type labels and axial grid after Furter 2014). Ropes and a large churn express the general theme of type 15, re-creation.

Nanke cave in Zimbabwe was part of a set of oracles, on par with Bronze Age and classical Greek, Egyptian and other sites. Roman spiritual centres such as the oracle of the dead at Baia, in the volcanic Bay of Naples near Rome, also had paintings at their entrances; likewise destroyed to re-distribute spiritual authority (Paget 1967. Temple 2003).

Table IV. Type characters in a Nanke Cave painting (noting archetypal features):

1 Builder; Shoulder-head of rope-man churn (twisted), leaning on staffs (trance, of 8 opposite).

2 Builder; Rope-man churn (twisted) (NO EYE).

2c Basket; Shoulder-head rear, ropes (weave). C-types are usually off the grid.

3 Queen; Ostrich (long neck).

4 King; Antelope cow?, with young.

5a Priest; Antelope running (active).

5b Priest; Bowman spanning (active).

5b Priest B; Priest? (ritual?), axis on his chest (heart, of 13 opposite) and three with beams (horizontal).

6 Exile; Antelope (horned). And swimmer (ingress).

7 Child; Swimmer or walker.

7g Galactic Centre; Swimmer, arms up (limb-joints?), staff (of 10). Some apparently interrupted artworks indicate that visual expression spirals out as bags or limbs (named ‘formlings’ in archaeology) from this junction.

8 Healer; Swimmer in churn centre (strong?), at rope-man’s legs (pillars).

9 Healer; Swimmer? (NO EYE).

9c Basket-Lid; Fish pool churn wave (weave, lid).

10 Teacher; Swimmer (arms up?).

11 Womb; Pregnant womb (womb).

12 Heart; Runner?

13 Heart; Lion (felid), axis on chest (heart, confirmed by 15-14-13 flat outline).

14 Mixer; Dancer (dance), arms up, staff (of 10).

15 Maker; Antelope between two ropes (rope).

15g Galactic Gate; Antelope rump (limb joint).

The axial centre is unmarked as usual.

4p Galactic S. Pole; Small bowman’s feet? (limb-joint?).

11p Galactic Pole; Bender’s shoulder (limb-joint).

Midsummer (cp); Churn’s front elbow (limb joint), on axis 14-15, implying spring and the cultural time-frame as Age Aries-Pisces, probably the perceived era of cultural formation. But midwinter (csp) could be on the churn’s hip (limb joint), on the axis 5, implying spring and the cultural time-frame as Age Taurus, typical of alchemical works in all cultures, and supported by the centrality and prominence of types 1 and 2. Structuralist time-frames are approximate.

The main general themes here are type 15 Maker and 15g, ropes, churn, re-creation, and limb joints. This theme also appears in Indian art and myth, as a milky ocean of soma at the former spring equinox. The infinity wimple also expresses totality of responses to external pressures, named ‘panarchical discourse’ in history (Gunderson et al 2009); or ‘phase transit’ in chaos theory 3D graphs. Another general theme in the work is type 10 Teacher; arms-up, staff, hunt master, ecology.

5 Structured campus at Delphi

Figure 5. Example of archetypal structure in Delphic Apollo precinct about BC 400 (plan after Coste-Messelière 1936. Type labels and axial grid by E Furter). General themes here include types 4 King (sun, twins, rectangles, walls, fish, here a dolphin); and 4p (junctures, water); and 5 Priest (ritual, varicoloured, hyperactive, judgement, ascension).

Table V. Typological characters at Delphi Apollo (noting archetypal features):

1 Builder; Krateros column (tower).

1 Builder B; Apollo temple west chamber.

2 Builder; Stadium stairs. Statue of Auriga, Charioteer.

3 Queen; Apollo temple centre, slain dragon (dragon, long neck, sacrifice). Stage apron Hercules frieze of tamed monsters (dragon, sacrifice).

3 Queen B; Archaic building.

2c Basket; Apollo’s interior omphalos stone (monster head) in a net (weave), sunken (2 pool). Statues of Krateros saving Alexander (2 twisted) in lion hunt (3 bent neck).

4 King; Dionysus two identical buildings (twins), brother (twins) of Apollo (king), twin (twins) of Artemis. Apollo Dolphin (fish) inner door, in building of two east-west diagonals (twins).

5a Priest; Apollo’s hut of bay branches, wax, feathers, bronze (varicoloured), two eagles (elemental, cardinal). Apollo as Zeus (priest), eagles crossed (4p juncture) to drop omphalos. Knydian hall (assembly), mural of wooden horse (equid).

5b Priest; Apollo Sitalcas, Grain Guard (of 10), highest at 70ft (large); Daochus, draped (sash), leg flexed (4), a Delphic priest (priest). Entrance pillar of Prusias2 of Bithynia, equestrian (equid). Euremedon palm (6 tree) by Agamemnon’s charioteer (equid). Many features (varied).

5c Basket-Tail; Neoptolemus sanctuary; Syracusian treasury; tripods (oracle) of Gelon and Hiero; Aemilius Paulus pillar for PrusiasII of Bithynia, equestrian (equid); Acanthus plant column (6 tree), three graces under a tripod (oracle. 6 chair) holding a cauldron (container); Sockle stone.

6 Exile; Attalos portico, protruding (egress); Chios altar (sacrifice); Akanthian treasury.

7 Child; Rhodian chariot (chariot); Plataian tri-serpent spiral column (unfolding. 8 snake); under a golden tripod (6 chair).

7g Galactic Centre; Athenian porch. Central gate (gate) to Kastalian spring (water).

8 Healer; Prytanaion, fire altar (flame).

9 Healer; Cyrenean; Corinthian; Athenian stoa (pillars).

9c Basket-Lid; Corcyrian Bull revealed (oracle) a tuna school (ophiotaurus, snake-bull, transition).

10 Teacher; Market gate (market). Statues of Aegospotiamoi; Arcadians; and Philopomen. Spartan Admirals (guard) monument, Lysander crowned (crown).

10 Teacher B; Statues of Spartans, Athenes, Argives, wolf logo (canid); Threshing floor, Halos (11 crops), where Apollo kills a fountain dragon (3 opposite).

11 Womb; Argive King’s crescent (interior). Seven Epigonoi crescent (interior). Both of Argos, ‘Wheat Field’ (crops).

12 Heart; Sikyonian treasury interior (interior), reliefs of war (war), spears (weapons). Cnydian treasury, Triopas, Artemis shooting (weapon) at Tityus.

13 Heart; Siphnian treasury interior (interior), frieze with lions (felid), gods in battle (war) v giants. Cnidian interior (interior).

13c Basket-Head; Sibylline rock (oracle).

14 Mixer; Theban, protruding (egress). Boeotian. Athenian, central (ingress).

15 Maker; Bouleuterion, ‘bread, chew, talk’ (order), of local council (sceptre).

15g Gate; Sanctuary of Ge (15 creation). Asklepius. Two main SW gates, Gymnasium gate (gates).

The axial centre is probably unmarked, as usual.

4p Gal. S. Pole; Dionysus stairs (juncture). Kassotis spring (spout). Site’s long axis (juncture). Alyattes’ silver wine bowl on spiralling iron bands (junctures). Apollo (4 king) pronaos cauldrons.

11p Galactic Pole; Threshing floor (11 crops) south corner (juncture), site’s long axis (juncture). Tarantines’ captive women (11 wombs). The galactic polar axle is on the site’s long axis (juncture).

Midsummer (cp); Had moved from the Sibyl rock north edge, near the north-south cardinal, to the tall Naxian winged sphinx column (junctures).

Midwinter (csp); Had moved from the Apollo temple left corner, to the platform left corner (junctures). These markers placed the site’s subconscious ‘summer’ in 14 and 15, thus ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame as Age Aries and Age Pisces (from about BC 1500, and from about BC 80); both ahead of the Age of the builders. ‘Predictive’ time-frames are typical of national legacy sites (Nemrut, Turkey, in Furter 2016: 238-241). Oracle sites seem to emphasise express the four transitional types (2c, 5c, 9c, 13c).

Delphic Apollo sanctuary nestles in a larger scale stoneprint in the area (not illustrated here; see note under 5b), wherein it probably expresses type 5 (assembly, varicoloured, ritual, hyperactive); as the Vatican City stoneprint is geared to the Rome stoneprint; as some Izapa stele engraving mindprints (such as the tree of life engraving) are part of a stele cluster stoneprint, which is part of a pyramid cluster stoneprint, which is part of a pyramid field stoneprint; as Teti’s pyramid group nestles in the Sakkara pyramid field stoneprint; as the Gobekli Tepe engravings form part of the houses, which express a larger scale stoneprint on Gobekli hill (Furter 2016, and 2016b; Expression 15).

Practical and conscious motivations are independent of subconscious archetypal structure. For example, Greek buildings were oriented by surveying one diagonal (crosswise, corner to corner) on a cardinal direction (east or north). Ranieri (2014) listed diagonal orientations of 200 Greek temples, including sixteen buildings of the Delphic Apollo sanctuary. The only overlap between regular geometry or celestial orientation, and the subconscious stoneprint, is in one element of the time-frame orientation. In Delphi, the galactic polar axle co-incides with the long axis of the site.

6. Structured city in Brussels

Figure 6. Example of archetypal structure in medieval Brussels (map after Pizzatravel. Type labels and axial grid by E Furter). General themes here include type 10 Teacher, of law enforcement (legislature, capital, and EU administration), balance (diplomacy), ecology and polarity.

Table VI. Typological characters in Medieval Brussels (noting archetypal features):

1 Builder; Congress Square obelisk (tower); and The Unknown Soldier; and Barricades Square.

2 Builder; Graphic Story centre (2c texture).

2c Basket; Paribas Fortis Bank (moving to a new building at type 13c in 2018).

3 Queen; Martyrs Square (sacrifice).

4 King; Our Lady (womb, of 11 opposite) of End of Earth, outside early medieval Brussels, and of Good Success. Northward lies the Atomium and Mini Europe.

5a Priest; Opera (hyperactive).

5b Priest; Origin Court; and Mint; and John Baptist of Beginnings, of camel skin coat (tailcoat). Outside the wall is another John Baptist.

5b Priest B; St Catherine, flying angel on a pillar (hyperactive, horizontal); Charcoal Lane, Brick lane (varicoloured); near St Géry and Notre Dame aux Riches.

5c Basket-Tail; Stock Exchange; St Nicholas, black (varicoloured), of merchants (varicoloured).

6 Exile; St Gorick. West lies the cruciform Realm building.

7 Child; Our Lady of Good Assistance, of nurses with bags (bag). A miraculous statue was found on Compostella pilgrimage route (bag). Former St James hospital. Large Market (bag, rope).

7g Galactic Centre; Fountain Square (water, light). Synagogue. St Anthony near the wall (juncture).

8 Healer; Peeing Boy fountain, Juliaanske ‘extinguished a bomb fuse to save the city under siege’ (strength feat), formerly of stone (pillar).

8B Healer; Near Europe statue (pillar). Axial centre of Brussels gates (strength. Not illustrated). Parliament (OFF GRID).

9 Healer; Our Lady of the Chapel, relics of St Boniface of Brussels opposed (strength) corrupt king FrederickII, and Francois Anneessens, beheaded for civil rights (strength).

9c Basket-Lid; Courts of Justice (10 enforcement, balance), ‘Gallows’ Hill.

10 Teacher; Our Lady on the Table, south facade.

11 Womb; Our Lady (womb) on the Table (platform, interior). A healing statue from Antwerp to the Crossbow guild.

12 Heart; St Jacques of Coudenberg; was chapel of Charles Quint. Royal Square (bastion). Palace 1500s, hall of Burgundy Dukes (bastion) ruin, 1775 Revolution law court (war), 1802 church.

13 Heart; Royal Palace (weapon) interior (heart).

13 Heart B; Brussels Park south pond (water-work).

13c Basket-Head; Brussels Park north pond. New Paribas Fortis Bank (bastion) with inner garden (interior), moved from 3 in 2018.

14 Mixer; National Palace. Former park (tree).

15 Maker; Cathedral Sts Michael and Gudule (doubled), Belgian patrons. Archbishop of Mechlin-Brussels (doubled), royal church (sceptre), ducal graves (sceptre). An 1100s church site. Window of LouisII of Hungary and his queen kneeling before Trinity (churn).

15g Gate; Freedom Square (juncture).

The axial centre is south of St Hubert Galleries, on the Montagne-Sculptor Roads intersection (junction).

11p Galactic Pole; Mont des Arts Park (juncture).

Midsummer (cp); Cathedral Square south end (juncture). Midwinter (csp); St Hubert Galleries south facade, on the east-west cardinal (orientation). These markers would place summer in 14-15, thus spring and the cultural time-frame as Age Aries-Pisces, at the start of the Christian era. The north-south cardinal indicates cosmological Age Pisces, contemporary with the work. Gates in the defensive wall of Brussels from another stoneprint around the old city centre, as in Piacenza, Rome, and elsewhere (see note on gates, at 8 above). Structuralist analysis of Brussels compares well with Paris (Furter 2017b) and London (Furter 2018b).

7. Structured emblems and alphabets

Some calendars, emblems and alphabets have similar sounds, numerals (in alphanumeric sets), pictographs, determinants, and related myths; in sequences that could be directly compared to one another, and to typological features isolated in artworks and other media, indicating that the natural blueprint extends to all cultural media. Some sets have fewer characters, usually skipping one of the doubled types (see __ blanks in Tables VII B and VII C). Alphabets have often been compared to hour asterisms to trace supposed diffusion, but never in the context of archetype informing various media (see Babylonian Plough Stars decans in Furter 2018a).

Cretan Archanes seals could be sequenced by archetypal features. The sets are highly stylised, and apparently without secure traditional sequence or fixed total. Comparison to other Cretan media, via the mindprint model, could resolve the sequence. About 26 often reproduced features include abstract ‘determinants’ that may be subconscious former or current spring markers (see types 2, 3, 4). These may compensate for lack of spatial layout and polar features. The set may illustrate a calendar or some other cycle, yet both sets would reveal collective and individual subconscious inspiration in the culture, in the re-designer, and in copyists.

Table VII. Typology in some Cretan Archanes seals.

Type; Upper Image (features); Lower Image (features):

2 Builder; Shelter or Trap (maze); on Antelope (bovid).

3 Queen; Flower (spring); on Horse (neck), Snake (dragon).

4 King; Two S-shapes (twins); on Horse (equid).

5a Priest; Zebra or horse (equid? colour?).

6 Exile; U-shape (U-shape).

7 Child; Centaur? In ropes (rope).

7g Gal.Centre; Hills or abstracts (unfolding?)

9 Healer; Podium (pillar), Herb (heal), Bent (bent).

10 Teacher; Double-axe (staff) of Apollo (teacher), Snake (snake, heal), Staff (staff).

11 Womb; Staff or Wheat (crops), Plough? (furrow?); Vase (womb).

11p Gal.Pole; Flower (junction).

13 Heart; Purse or Hand or Heart (heart?).

14 Mixer; Honey? (energy?), Brewer? (transformation).

15 Maker; Leg (smite? rampant?).

Figure 7. Fourteen Cretan Archanes seals (after Sakellarakis et al 1997. Type labels and sequence by E Furter).

7.1 Structured Germanic runes

The conventional 18 runes have graphic and phonologic counterparts in the Latin alphabet. The six others making up the conventional set of 24 runes, derive from a North Italic alphabet in the first century AD (Looijenga 1997). However runes assumed their own sequence, and set of emblematic derivations, both now testable against archetypal typology. Runes are conventionally listed from F, Wealth (here type 1 B). The tables follow Latin convention from A 1 (type 14).

Table VII B. Typology in Semitic alphanumeric sets (after Goldwasser 2006), v 22 Germanic runes, v Hour decans (after Furter 2014).

Type; Sound Numeral; Rune (features); Hour decan

14 Mixer; A 1; Speech (jaw, limb-joint); Ursa Minor.

15 Maker; B 2; Bough, Family (sceptre, ancestor); Canis Min.

15g Gate; G 3; Gift (bag); Galactic Gate or Canis.

1 Builder; D 4; Sun (former spring); ____­_.

1 Builder B; F/V 5; Wealth (bovid); Hyades.

2 Builder; W/Ng 6; Hail (rain, cluster); Pleiades.

2c Basket; Z/Gw 7; ____; (Diphthong)(transit); Algol.

3 Queen; EH 8; Horse (neck); Pegasus.

4 King; TH? 9; Thorn, Hammer (spring); Pisces Cord.

4p Gal.S.P.; Y/R? 10; Tree (junction); Pegasus neck.

5a Priest; K 20; Flame (4 furnace); Aquarius latter.

5b Priest; L 30; Water (water); Aquarius prior.

6 Exile; M 40; Man (scapegoat?); Cygnus?

7 Child; N 50; Chariot (chariot); Sagittarius.

7g Gal.Centre; Xi 60; Constraint (junction); Serpens Cauda.

8 Healer; AY Y 70; Home (hearth, heal); Scorpius Sting.

9 Healer; P 80; Hearth (hearth, heal); Scorpius Antares.

10 Teacher; R? 100; Ride (9 trance); Bootes.

11 Womb; HD 90; Fork, Tyr (10 staff, arms), Star Spica.

12 Heart; S 200; Ship (interior); Argo.

13 Heart; T 300; Horn, Bull, Sun (ruler); Leo Regulus.

14 Mixer; U 400; Joy (honey?); Beehive?

15 Maker; PH 500; Couple (double), Spell (churn); Gemini.

7.2    Structured Mayan day hieroglyphs

The Mayan ‘month’ of 20 days, part of the Tzolk’in, 20×13=260 days, has its own set of emblematic ‘derivations’, now testable against archetypal typology. The 20-day birthday cycle is a powerful predictor of personality globally, independent of annual seasonal calibrators and of Western astrology. Mayan days are conventionally listed from Crocodile or Water (here type 3). The tables follow Latin convention from A 1 (type 14).

Table VII C. Typology in Semitic alphabets (after Goldwasser 2006); v 20 Mayan day hieroglyphs, Limbs, and Images (after Pinzon 1995); v Hour decans (after Furter 2014).

Type; Sound Numeral; Mayan hieroglyph (features); Limb, Image; Hour decan.

14 Mixer; A 1; Vulture (bird); Tongue, Spirals (polar); Ursa (polar).

15 Maker; B 2; Motion (churn, polar); ____; Ursa Minor (polar).

15g Gate; G 3; Knife (risk); mouth (joint), Skull?; Orion Club (junct).

1 Builder; D 4; Rain (storm); Eye, ____; Orion.

2 Builder; F/V 5; [Sun?]; ___; ___ [Mayan skip]; Hyades?

2c Basket; W/GN 6/7; Flower (cluster); Eye, _; Pleiades.

3 Queen; EH/Th 8; Croc (dragon); Chest, _; Cetus Tail.

4 King; TH? 9; Wind (field?); Lung (furnace), _; Pegasus.

4p Gal.S.P.; Y R? 10; House (junct, pillar); _; Pegasus legs.

5a Priest;   K 20; Lizard (reptile); Hip?, ___; Aquarius.

5c B.Tail; L 30; Snake-knot (reptile, weave); Genital, R/snake; Capr.tail.

6 Exile;  M 40; Frog (fish), Death (sacrif); Ear (bleat), _; Capr (fish, goat).

7 Child;  N 50; Deer (juvenile?); Ear, ______; Sagittarius.

7 Child B; Xi 60; Rabbit (juvenile); Foot (joint), _; Tail, Serp.Cau., Tail.

7g G.Cntr; AY 70; Water (junction); _, _; Galaxy (water).

8 Healer; P 80; __; __; __ [Mayan skip]; Scorpius Sting.

9 Healer; R? 100; Dog (canid); Foot, ____; Lupus.

9c Lid; HD 90; _____? (diphtong)(transit); __; Serpens.

10 Teacher; S 200; Monkey (arms); arms (arms), Lizard (arms); Bootes.

11 Virgo; T 300; Grass (crops); womb (womb); _; Spica.

11p Gal.P.; U 400; Reeds (junct); _______; Coma (hair).

12 Heart; PH 500; Ocelot (‘felid’); Foot, __; Leo retro.

13 Heart; CH 600; Eagle (bird, polar); Hand; __; Ursa.

8. Conclusion

Hundreds of examples confirm that the large, specific, layered, rigorous repertoire of global, subconscious, individual and collective behaviour, is measurable and testable in several cultural media. The archetypal structuralist model of direct, simplistic features, made complex by their inter-dependence, indicates that archetype eternally guides and bounds re-expressions in nature and culture. This model challenges the paradigm of culture as ‘conscious’, with ‘creative options’ that ‘evolve’; and challenges correspondence theories and diffusion theories in science and in popular culture. The largely unstated and untested general paradigm is common to human sciences, and thus likely to resist data, models and even evidence to the contrary (Thomas Kuhn 1966). Evolution is one of the archetypes eternally dominating human sciences, by analogy to individual and technological maturity curves; which actually depend on ecology, population density and specialisation. Apparently diverse and unrelated features, consistent across time and place, confirms that cosmology is part of archetypal expression in all media, not ‘degraded science’ as De Santillana (1969) and others tried to demonstrate by ironically invoking ‘devolution’ into the diffusionist paradigm. Popular anthropology is particularly fond of correspondences, diffusion and devolution based on various assumed golden eras. As members of polities, scientists have some individual and collective vested interests in maintaining illusions of ‘cultural differences’. But scientists are equally compelled to study our species as objectively as possible.

The often silent assumption that media illustrate one another, such as art ‘illustrating’ ethnography or ritual; or myth ‘collating collective memories of major or repetitive events’; or symbols or divination features ‘deriving from’ analogies; should take caution that studies of cultural content and ‘origins’ agree with conscious, rationalised views of crafters and users. There was no conscious model, nor paradigm, for mathematical order in culture, such as the sizes of civic populations (Zipf 1949), or consistent average frequencies of specific features. Perception, expression and possibly meaning itself, is now revealed as ‘wired’ to archetype; and hidden by conscious habits, and our inability to recognise quirky rules as consistent. The core content of culture was static, and is likely to remain so, despite conscious discovery and diffusion of its features. Our repertoire of innate behaviour indicates that archetype guides nature and culture at several levels of scale, across media ‘boundaries’.

The archetypal structuralist model also finds support in some natural structures, such as the periodic table (Furter 2016). The high level of detail demonstrated in compulsive cultural expressions, invite automation of subconscious individual and social behaviour. Stalemates between rival anthropology models (Endicott et al 2005; Turner 2009) could be resolved by study of archetypal behaviour.

We could not know archetypes’ origin, as Plato realised, but we could study her expressions to explore our individual and collective roles in integration and self-actualisation. Our cultural works serve more purposes than we consciously know. Their study requires scientific integration and maturity. Structuralist anthropology has some experience in ‘tacking’ between data sets apparently in ‘disunity’, across time, place and layers of consciousness, as advocated by Alyson Wylie (1989, after Bernstein). Human sciences could extend its scope to global, diachronic behaviour. An opportunity, and perhaps a pressing need in the humanities, is to recognise differences between core culture and localised ‘branding’, and to inform society undergoing unprecedented globalisation and ‘culture’ shock. As nations and cities faction and fraction due to rival socio-economic bonds, the humanities could raise knowledge or our collective subconscious impulses, and our need for minor polity differences. A small step from modelling cultures, to modelling culture, may offer a leap in human sciences applications, validity and relevance, and potentially in general understanding of our place within nature.

References

Boole, G, 1854 /2003. Laws of thought. Buffalo:  Prometheus Books

De Santillana G. and Von Deschend, H. 1969. Hamlet’s Mill: An essay on myth and the frame of time. Boston: Gambit

Endicott, K. M. and Welsch, R.L. 2005. Taking sides. Third edition. Iowa: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin

Furter, E. 2014. Mindprint, the subconscious art code. USA: Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2015a. Gobekli Tepe, between rock art and art. Expression 8. Italy: Atelier Etno

Furter, E. 2015b. Rock art expresses cultural structure. Expression 9. Italy: Atelier Etno

Furter, E. 2016a. Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities. Johannesburg: Four Equators Media

Furter, E. 2017a. Recurrent characters in rock art reveal objective meaning. Expression 16, June. Italy: Atelier Etno Expression 16, June. Also in Expression 2019; Message behind the image. Book 25

Furter, E. 2017b. Stoneprint tour of Paris. Stoneprint Journal 3. USA: Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2018a. ‘Babylonian Plough List decans’. http://www.stoneprintjournal.blog

Furter, E. 2018b. Stoneprint tour of London. Stoneprint Journal 4. USA: Lulu.com

Furter, E. 2018c. Culture code in seals and ring stamps. Stoneprint Journal 5. USA, Lulu.com

Goldwasser, O. 2006. Canaanites reading hieroglyphs. Egypt and Levant 16: 121-160

Gunderson, L. H. and Holling, C. S. 2009. Panarchy; understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington: Island Press

Harrod, J. B. 2018. A post-structuralist revised Weil–Lévi-Strauss transformation formula for conceptual value-fields. Sign Systems Studies, November. USA: Center for Research on the Origins of Art and Religion

Hays, H. R. 1958. From ape to angel. London: Methuen

Jung, C. G. and Jaffe, A. 1965. Memories, Dreams, Reflections. New York: Random House, p392-393

Kuhn, T. 1966. Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 3rd ed. Chicago: Univ of Chicago Press

Levi-Strauss, C. 1973. From honey to ashes. Harper & Row

Levi-Strauss, C. 1955. Mathematics of Man. Paris: Bulletin International des Sciences Sociales 6:4.

Lewis-Williams, D., Pearce, D. 2012. Framed idiosyncrasy, method and evidence in the interpretation of San rock art. Johannesburg: SA Archaeological Bulletin 67, 75-87

Liritzis I. and Vassiliou H. 2003. Archaeo-astronomical orientation of seven significant ancient Hellenic temples. Athens: Archaeo-astronomy: the Journal of Astronomy in Culture, 17, 2003, 94-100

Looijenga, J. H. 1997. Runes around the North Sea and on the continent AD 150-700; texts and contexts. Netherlands: Rijksuniversiteit van Groningen, doctorate

Neugebauer, O. and Parker, R. 1969. Egyptian astronomical texts 3; Decans, planets, constellations and zodiacs. USA: Brown University Press

Paget, R. F. 1967. In the footsteps of Orpheus. London: Robert Hale

Parry, E. 2012. Rock art of the Matopo hills. Bulawayo: Amabooks

Pinzon, S. 1995. Early history of Belize. Ambergriscaye.com/earlyhistory/glyphs. Belize: Casado.net

Ranieri, M. 2014. Digging the archives; orientation of Greek temples and their diagonals. Athens: Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, Vol 14, No3, 15-27

Sakellarakis, Y. and Sapouna-Sakellaraki, E. (1997) Archanes: Minoan Crete in a new light. Athens: Ammos

Temple, R. 2003. Netherworld. London: Century

Turner, T. S. 2009. Crisis of Late Structuralism. Perspectivism and Animism: Rethinking Culture, Nature, Spirit, and Bodiliness. Tipití: Journal of the Society for the Anthropology of Lowland South America: Vol. 7: Issuse 1, Article 1

Wood, P. 2015. Ferguson and the decline in Anthropology. USA: National Association of Scholars, Jan 20

Wylie, A. 1989. Archaeological cables and tacking: the implications of practice for Bernstein’s options, beyond objectivism and relativism. USA: Philosophy of Social Sciences 19(1), March, 1-18

Zipf, G.K. 1949. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. USA: Addison-Wesley

Categories
How to identify mindprint types and structure in art Mindprint the subconscious art code Structural art analysis using mindprint

The mindprint model of archetype in culture, update 2019

The five subconscious, structured layers of expression globally, are (a) typological characters with specific optional features; (b) type sequence, clockwise or anti-clockwise; (c) axial grid between eyes or focal points of pairs of opposite types; (d) three pairs of polar junctures, implying three planes of expression; (e) orientation of polar pairs vertical or horizontal to the ground-line or a cardinal direction, co-incidental with the seasonal time-frame of the local culture.

Types could be labelled after any popular set, such as species, myths or months. Generic labels, such as social functions, avoid the false impression of diffusion from one particular medium or culture. Correspondence theories are often misled by recurrent archetypal features, or by inevitable cross-references between media and cultures, into assuming diffusion, and ignoring the innate roles of nature in culture.

Mindprint or stoneprint model of character types, in their peripheral sequence, as pairs of opposites forming an axial grid of eyes, with five polar points of limb joints or junctures.

Characters expressing the types always have their eyes (except a womb at 11, and a heart at 12/13; or interior focal points in built sites), on an axial grid, formed by standard pairs (1v8, 2v9, etc). Our works also express two ‘galactic’ polar points (4p v 11p); and two galactic crossings (7g v 15g); and three polar points: Midsummer or Celestial Pole (cp), Midwinter or Celestial South Pole (csp); and Ecliptic Pole at the axial centre. Polar points are not on eyes, but on limb joints (or junctures in built sites). Four of the types could be double, as they are in the figure (1v8, 2v9; and 5a v12, 5b v13); or single (2v9 and 5v13 only); thus the total is usually twelve, fourteen or sixteen. Some other pairs may also be doubled in complex artworks or built sites. The axial grid always confirms the peripheral sequence.

This post is an extract from Stoneprint Journal 6; Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour, Lulu.com, $10. Order the guide here: http://www.lulu.com/shop/edmond-furter/stoneprint-journal-6-rennes-le-chateau-tour/paperback/product-23969009.html

Here is the January 2019 update of typological features, and their global average frequencies.

Axial graph of percentages of the seven most common features, of the minimal twelve types, and four border types. Adjacent types 1/2, 5a/5b, 8/9, and 12/13 share features at nearly the same frequencies, thus their data are currently combined. These may be differentiated in further study.

Type label; recurrent features of characters in any artwork, built site, or craft set, in peripheral sequence, with average frequencies:

1 /2 Builder; twist 44%, cluster 23%, bovid 19%, bird 19%, tower 18%, build 14%, sack 10%, hero 10%, book 8%, rain,

2c Basket; weave 25%, container20% instrument 20%, shoulder-hump 20%, hat 15%, throne 10%, snake 10%,

3 Queen; neck-bend 31%, dragon 19%, sacrifice 17%, queen 13%, school 12%, spring 10%, fish 6%, ram 4%,

4 King; squat 30%, rectangle 28%, king  22%, twins 13%, sun 12%, bird 10%, fish 8%, furnace 8%, field 5%,

4p Galactic South Pole; limb-joint 67%; juncture 17% (spout 12%, stream, speech,

5a/5b Priest; varicoloured 37%, priest 34%, hyperactive 33%, tailcoat-head 32%, assembly 30%, horizontal 28%, water 24%, heart 24%, large 24%, bovid 20%, winged 14%, invert 12%, reptile 10%, sash 8%, equid, ascend,

5c Basket-Tail; weave 16%, tail 14%, U-shape 10%, contain 8%, herb 4%, oracle,

6 Exile; in/egress 58%, horned 44%, sacrifice 30%, small 14%, U-shape 13%, double-head 12%, caprid 8%,

7 Child; rope 24%, juvenile 24%, bag 22%, unfold 13%, beheaded 10%, chariot 8%, mace 6%, off-grid,

7g Galactic Centre; limb-joint 38%; juncture 34% (throne, altar, spiral, tree, staff); path/gate 18%; water 16%,

8/9 Healer; bent 28%, strong 28%, pillar 28%, heal 22%, disc 14%, metal 8%,

9c Basket Lid; disc/hat 27%, instrument 25%, reveal 16%, hump 15%, weave 8%,

10 Teacher; W-shape 44%, staff 36%, hunt master 24%, guard 20%, metal 14%, market 14%, disc 12%, council 11%, snake 8%, ecology 8%, school 6%, wheel,

11 Womb; womb 88%, wheat 15%, water 14%, tomb 11%, interior 8%, library 8%, law 5%, felid 5%,

11p Gal. Pole; limb-joint 64% (hand 12%, elbow 10%, foot 12%, etc); juncture 24% (door 12%, corner, etc),

12/13 Heart; heart 83%, felid 42%, death 34%, rounded 21%, invert 14%, weapon 11%, war 9%, water-work 8%,

13c Basket-Head; oracle 14%, head 14%, weave 8%, ship,

14 Mixer; in/egress 43%, time 28%, tree 20%, angel 15%, bird 11%, antelope 10%, dancer 8%, felid 8%, reptile 4%,

15 Maker; churn 44%, rope 28%, order 27%, rampant 26%, bag 20%, mace 16%, doubled 16%, face 12%, canid 12%, sceptre 11%, smite 8%, reptile 8%, winged 8%,

15g Galactic Gate; junction 30% (river 10%); limb-joint 12%,

The five polar features also have global average frequencies. The axial centre is usually unmarked at about 60%, or on a limb-joint or juncture. Midsummer (cp) is on a limb joint 54%, or juncture 24%. Midwinter (csp) is on a limb joint 46%, or juncture 24%. One of the polar axles is on the horizontal plane 50%, or vertical plane 12% (or on a north-south meridian or east-west latitude in a built site).

Polar markers usually place midsummer on or near type 12, 13, 14 or 15, implying spring and the cultural time-frame 90 degrees earlier (in seasonal terms), in Age Taurus1, Taurus2, Aries3 or Pisces4. The spring type is often confirmed by some kind of prominence of the character expressing type 1, 2, 3 or 4.

The general theme of a work is indicated by features that are prominent, or shared by three or more characters. Works or sets express about 60% of the already known 100 optional, measurable, recurrent features. The identified features are not of conscious design. Structural or ‘grammatical’ layers of expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters, and members of any culture. Rigorous average frequencies and consistency through ages, also rule out nurture. The full repertoire appears in the oldest examples, in Ice Age art of about BC 26 000 (Furter 2014), ruling out accumulation of idiosyncratic ‘ideas’, and of localised cultural ‘frameworks’, as some anthropologists and rock art archaeologists believe (Lewis-Williams and Pierce 2012).

Use this link to buy Stoneprint Journal 6; Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour, Lulu.com, $10: http://www.lulu.com/shop/edmond-furter/stoneprint-journal-6-rennes-le-chateau-tour/paperback/product-23969009.html

== Extract from STONEPRINT Journal Series. Supplement to Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities. Order the book, or journal editions; or contribute articles, on edmondfurter at gmail dot com, or +27 (0)11 955 6732, Four Equators Media, Johannesburg. See also http://www.stoneprintjournal. blog  www.mindprintart.wordpress.com  www.edmondfurter.wordpress.com

Back editions at $12;

1 Pictish beasts

2 Crop circles are natural artworks

3 Stoneprint tour of Paris

4 Stoneprint tour of London. 24pp, $18. Also from Lulu.com

5 Culture code in seals and ring stamps. Also from Lulu.com

6 Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour, 20pp. Lulu.com, $10, http://www.lulu.com/shop/edmond-furter/stoneprint-journal-6-rennes-le-chateau-tour/paperback/product-23969009.html

Categories
Mindprint the subconscious art code

Introduction to Mindprint, the subconscious art code

In artefacts and artworks, where archaeo astronomers see ancient star maps, archaeologists see cultural traditions, and anthropologists see initiation secrets, appear a standard axial grid of archetypes, always in the same sequence.

[UPDATE 2016: Mindprint demonstrated our individual expression of archetype in art. The book laid the foundation for revealing our innate, subconscious, collective expression of archetypal structure, in buildings, villages, temples complexes, pyramid fields, geoglyphs and cities. Our collective subconscious is revealed in Stoneprint, with 400 pages and 130 illustrations, placing subconscious behaviour in the context of five sciences and several cultural crafts. Visit www.stoneprint.wordpress.com for extracts from this important new book.]

The subconscious art code or human imprint also appears in our eye, hand and body reflexology points, and in cosmology. Constellations are only myth maps, but myth, and therefore constellations, also bear the imprint of the structure of our perception.

All inspired artists, in the Stone, Ice, Bronze and Iron Ages; Babylonians, Egyptians, Chinese, Celts, Mayans, Vikings and moderns, subconsciously express mindprint, our eternal artefact.

The core content of art, myth and culture around the world is identical. Beneath thin layers of flamboyant styling and learning lies a surprisingly standard structure, beyond the conscious control of artists, mystery schools or secret societies.

All inspired artworks containing more than ten figures express a standard, involuntary sequence of types. Artists are not aware that their eye -hand -mind co-ordination expresses a universal structure.

Each figure type is characterised by one or two of its optional attributes and by its relative position. The types are spaced as paired opposites around an irregular ellipse, and precisely anchored to a standard axial structure, hinged on a geometric centre with tri-polar elements.

The structure emerging in the 200 illustrations and in the statistical analysis, is a visual grammar or art code, never before described in art history, archaeology, psychology, esoterica or popular crafts. The book is written as popular archaeology, but it has several implications for academic research.

Archetypes could be labelled in mythical, seasonal or astrological terms, yet none of these sets are origins of archetype. All are equally partial and imperfect expressions of pre-existent, universal structure.

The underlying structure of nature, culture and perception is largely subconscious, not fully verbalised by artists or viewers. Now these subconscious meanings are rendered partially conscious, and accessible by identifying relevant features, and thus types, and by using a list of the average frequencies of occurrences of the features of typology, and using the axial grid structure.

The axial geometric structure in the positioning of the eyes of the sequence of figures is made visible by drawing a set of lines that always cross in one point. This structure is visually disguised by some radial distortion (a sunburst shape); variety of subject and style; and two standard deviations, to a heart as a kind of spiritual eye, and to a womb as a kind of unborn eye.

Visual expression arises from nature, reflexology, and the collective subconscious. Learning, borrowing and idiosyncratic features do not affect the options, nor their average frequencies. The structure of perception and expression, or archetype, is inherent in all forms of figurative arts and crafts, including engravings, murals, frescoes, spiritual, religious, political and portable artefacts, professional and amateur art; and building sites (see http://www.stoneprintjournal.blog). Mindprint in ‘story’ paintings on buffalo skin are among the many indications that archetypal structure also enables myth, legend, perception, and to some extent, events.

The ‘readable’ elements in visual expression reveal a similar structure in myth, literature, cosmology, calendric cycles and nature, confirming the role of what philosophy and psychology describe as archetype.

Myth likewise uses characters differentiated by stock attributes, actions, motivations and episodes, and also expresses natural, social and cultural structure.

Art is less constrained by conscious cognitive processes than myth, which is bound by verbal, acoustic and dramatic grammar. Visual art is more direct, more impulsive, more compulsive to artists and viewers, more layered, and closer to inspiration.

The subconscious imprint, referred to as mindprint, tupos (imprint), art code, human subtext, Furter grid or archetypal art code, is predictive and testable. Practical proof of the persistence and prevalence of mindprint in art is illustrated in 200 of the 400 artworks and rock art works listed in the Index (some of the further 600 demonstrations are posted on this site, and the three related sites).

Major, testable, conceptual, as well as minor attributes of types, each with their average occurrences, invariably marked by the standard axial grid, are listed in Mindprint (2014, Lulu.com), in the Introduction and in the Statistical test chapter.

Type 5 Priest or Aquarius, for example, is varicoloured (44%), horizontal (30%), in active posture (31%), and among the four large chracters (24%) on average in all artworks [the list of known features, and known average frequencies, was extended by new discoveries in Stoneprint, and in editions of Stoneprint Journal, in 2018, and 2019; see extracts on http://www.stoneprintjournal.wordpress.com].

Type 10 Teacher or Libra has an arm or arms in V- or W-shape (53%) and holds a staff (34%) on average in all artworks.

Based on overwhelming statistical and geometric evidence of the collective, universal, subconscious sequence of optional attributes in inspired art, and of the conceptual relationships between the optional elements of each type, the tables of myths, icons, constellations and concepts in this study are proven.

They describe the standard structure of visual expression, as an involuntary art code arising from subconscious inspiration.

Additional variant expressions of each type are also considered, for example type 15 Maker or Gemini as a rope (33%) and/or bag (21%), and/or creator (such as Ptah), and/or smiting (16%), and/or doubled as in the concept of Gemini (8%) [however twins is a feature of type 4 King or Pisces], and/or canine, and/or with a hip wound, and/or in a boat shrine (of minor percentages). Identification of types rises above 90% if these variants (discussed in the Attributes section, Tables and captions) are considered together.

(Excerpt from the Introduction to Mindprint, the subconscious art code, by Edmond Furter, 2014, Lulu.com, 266 pages; 100 pages of context and explanation, 200 illustrations. The book is on mail order from Lulu in the USA at $29 plus $8 postage ($37, about R370), and at presentations in South Africa at R250. Order directly from Lulu, not from other websites that may add their costs to the price.

Categories
Mindprint the subconscious art code

What is mindprint, the subconscious art code

An Australian Kimberley Gwion 'Sashes' area rock art image (Bradshaw Foundation) of dancers, one with a long-necked mask, with mindprint labels and axes by Edmond Furter.
An Australian Kimberley Gwion ‘Sashes’ area rock art image (Bradshaw Foundation) of dancers, one with a long-necked mask, with typology labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter.
Mindprint or stoneprint model of character types, in their peripheral sequence, as pairs of opposites forming an axial grid of eyes, with five polar points of limb joints or junctures.

Mindprint is sixteen recurrent character types, each expressing a cluster of optional archetypal features, and each feature at a specific fixed frequency globally; with the eyes or focal points of pairs of opposite forming an axial grid; surrounding five polar points of limb joints or junctures in specific sectors.

The eyes or focal points of typological characters are replaced by a heart and a womb, in adjacent positions; at type 12 and/or 13 Heart, and type 11 Womb. Characters form an irregular and ragged oval, at varied radii. The spatial structure is analogous to a flattened cosmic sphere of three planes (ecliptic, galactic and celestial), with polar features of the underside or ‘south’ visible as limb joints in certain positions.

One or both the ‘celestial’ poles is incidental with the position of the midsummer and midwinter solstices, as it was in one of the last three astrological Ages (or four mindprint Ages, since Age Taurus is doubled). Celestial poles move in an inward spiral arc around the ecliptic pole, analogous to precession, and the Age of the artist’s or builders’ culture, usually the Age before the work.

Four of the types are optionally doubled or single; types 1 and/or 2 Builder or Taurus, are opposite types 8/9 Healer or Scorpius; and types 5a/5b Priest or Aquarius, are opposite types 12/13 Heart or Leo. Type 5 repeats is number in the first magnitude series (some cultural media express two or three cycles of mindprint, where 5:20 and 5:21 are differentiated by their numbers). Thus the highest type number in the first magnitude is type 15 Maker or Gemini, however there are sixteen types, since label 5 is initially repeated.

Known magnitudes of the sixteen types are 0:15, 1:16, 2:17, 3:18, 4:19, 5:20, 5:21 (where the sequence changes to sequential numbers), 6:22, etc (from where the sequence is validated against atomic numbers in the periodic table, and against features of the I Ching, though not against the variant number sequences of divination sets).

The entire arrangement of five layers of structure, is subconscious and compulsive to artists, and independent of conscious and conventional attributes, design grids, perspective lines, and ‘conceptual’ meanings and conscious symbolism. Conscious ‘logic’ or rationalisation offers various layers of optionality to artists, builders and cultures, but the subconscious archetypal features remain standard in all cultures, areas and ages.

Mindprint was discovered in 2010, and its types, attributes, geometry, polar structure and correspondence with myth, emblems, the Tarot deck and astronomy (particularly hour decans or ‘lunar’ calendars) were assigned, numbered and tabulated by Edmond Furter, and published in the art analysis, anthropology and archaeo-astronomy book Mindprint, the subconscious art code, in August 2014 (Lulu.com).

After Furter, ED, 2014. Mindprint, the subconscious art code. Lulu.com

Terminology and data has since been updated in Stoneprint, and in Stoneprint Journal editions.

 

Update of typology labels, features, and global average occurrence (January 2019)

This table also serves as a standard format for testing and reporting the identification of subconscious, archetypal features in artworks, rock art works, building sites, or other media.

Site /Artwork,,,, expresses ,,,,

This ,,,,, in ,,,,, is noted for ,,,,,.

General themes in the work include types ,,,,

In any artwork, building site, or sequential craft set (calendar, gods, divination list, alphabet, emblems), characters form an axial grid by their eyes or focal points, and express about 60% of these recurrent feature clusters, with each feature at a measurable universal average frequency

Type; Character (archetypal features with average frequencies):

01 /02 Builder; twist 44%, cluster 23%, bovid 19%, bird 19%, tower 18%, build 14%, sack 10%, hero 10%, book 8%, spring 8%, maze 8%, pit 8%,

02c Basket; weave 25%, container 20%, instrument 20%, shoulderhump 20%, hat 15%, weapon 15%, throne 10%, snake 10%, secret 10%, planet 7%;; armlink 50%, leglink 20%,

03 Queen; neckbend 31%, dragon 19%, sacrifice 17%, queen 13%,school 12%, spring 10%, fish 6%, ram 4%, pool,

04 King; squat 30%, rectangle 28%, king  22%, twins 13%, sun 12%, bird 10%, fish 8%, furnace 8%, field 5%,

04p Galactic South Pole; limbjoint 67%; juncture 17% (spout 12%, stream, speech, spit),

05a /05b Priest; varicoloured 37%, priest 34%, hyperactive 33%, tailcoathead 32%, assembly 30%, horizontal 28%, water 24%, heart 24%, large 24%, bovid 20%, reptile 10%, winged 14%, invert 12%, sash 8%, judgement 8%, weapon of opposite 7%, felid of opposite, equid, ascend,

05c Baskethead; weave 16%, tail 14%, U-shape 10%, container 8%, tree/herb 4%, oracle(maze), spirit (ka), spheres, route, horned (of 6), disc,

06 Exile; ingress/egress 58%, horned 44%, sacrifice 30%, small 14%, U-shape 13%, doublehead 12%, caprid 8%, reptile 6%, tree 4%, disarmed,

07 Child; rope 24%, juvenile 24%, bag 22%, unfold 13%, beheaded 10%, chariot 8%, mace 6%, off-grid,

07g Galactic Centre; limbjoint 38% (foot 26%); juncture 34% (throne, altar, line, spiral, tree, staff); path/gate 18%; water 16%,

08 /09 Healer; bent 28%, strong 28%, pillar 28%, heal 22%, disc 14%, smelt 8%, ritual 6%, bag 6%, head 4%, canid 4%, ram 4%, scorpion,

09c BasketLid; disc 27% (hat 15%, lid 12%); instrument? 25%, reveal 16%, hump 15%, planet 10%, weave 8%, enforce 7%, pillar  6%, snake 5%, metal 4%;; armlink 54%, leglink 20%,

10 Teacher; W-shape 44% (arm/s 28%), staff 36%, huntmaster 24%, guard 20%, metal 14%, market 14%, disc 12%, council 11%, snake 8%, ecology 8%, school 6%, carousel 4%, canid 4%, horns 4%, fish 4%,

11 Womb; womb 88%, wheat 15%, water 14%, tomb 11%, interior 8%, library 8%, law 5%, felid 5%.

11p Gal. Pole; limbjoint 64% (hand 12%, foot 12%, elbow 10%); juncture 24% (door 12%),

12/13 Heart; heart 83%, felid 42%, death 34%, round 21%, invert 14%, weapon 11%, war 9%, waterwork 8%, angel 4%,

13c BasketTail; oracle 14%, head 14%, hat/lid 10%, weave 8%, tree 6%, tail 4%,

14 Mixer; ingress/egress 43%, time 28%, tree 20%, angel 15%, bird 11%, antelope 10%, felid 8%, dancer 8%, reptile 4%, fish 4%, canid 4%,

15 Maker; churn 44%, rope 28%, order 27%, rampant 26%, bag 20%, mace 16% (weapon 12%), doubled 16%, canid 12%, face 12%, sceptre 11%, smiting 8%, reptile 8%, winged 8%,

15g Galactic Gate; juncture 30% (river 10%); limbjoint 12% (jaw 8%),

The axial centre or ‘Ecliptic pole’ is unmarked 59%, limb joint 24%, juncture 14%.

Midsummer or ‘Celestial pole’ is a limb joint 54%, juncture 24%.

Midwinter or ‘Celestial South Pole’ is a limb joint 46%, juncture 24%.

Solstice polar orientation is on the horizontal 50% /vertical 12% plane, or north-south meridian or east-west latitude.

Polar markers place ‘summer’ in Leo /Cancer /Gemini, thus ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus /Aries /Pisces, confirmed by a prominence.

The general theme of dispersed features is type __

Structural layers of expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters, and members of any culture.

An analysis could be scored as __/75 archetypal features; __/16 axial points; _/5 polar markers; _/1 planar or cardinal orientation; _/1 correlation with the Age, or Age prior to the work; _/2 general themes; thus __/100, minus __ extra characters off the axial grid; total __%. The average analysis score is 60%, in a sigma range of about 0.4 (40% range), from 40% to 80% of known features. The scoring formula may change if more features are isolated.

Mindprint book summary

The introduction explains how to read the illustration labels (see a post and comments on www.edmondfurter.wordpress.com), and reveals the types and structural features in art. It also notes some aspects of their disguise.

Chapter A demonstrates six examples of the typological sequence, and explains structural sets in nature, myth, grammar and our subconscious.

Chapter B demonstrates the structure in our iris and bodies, and explains our structural perception, inspiration, consciousness, psychology and disguise.

Chapter C demonstrates the structure in our hands, and explains the co-incidence of structure in our bodies, culture, events and literature.

Chapter D demonstrates cosmic structure and explains structural cosmology, astronomy and astrology.

Chapter E demonstrates cosmic polar structure and explains structural time, Ages, archaeo astronomy, planets and spherical doubling.

Chapter F demonstrates artistic structure in a famous painting by Pierro de Cosimo (see below), and explains structural symbolism, artistic functions, initiation and esoterica.

Chapter G demonstrates a rock art painting process, and explains structural inspiration and compulsive expression.

Chapter H tests mindprint in two Egyptian decanal sets [Narmer and Dendera; see below], and explains conscious aspects of expression, as well as the Tarot trump sequence numbering.

Chapter J lists the attributes and concepts of the sixteen types, reduces these to tables, offers a format for artistic typological data, formulates a statistical test, tests 170 artworks, lists and explains the results. It also demonstrates how to identify visual types and archetypal structure in art, speculates on the possibility of prior discovery, and lists the few inherent ambiguities among some types.

Chapter K compares scientific and esoteric paradigms, illustrates natural ‘art’, and speculates on the implications of the discovery of mindprint for some sciences and crafts.

Chapter L demonstrates mindprint in 200 artworks (the book contains 214 examples in total), grouped by their dominant themes, and ordered to compare rock art against schooled art. Some notable details are explained.

The postscript explains how the visual types and structure were found. (see below)

Mindprint index

  • How to read the illustration labels
  • The typological sequence and axial grid
  • The subconscious artefact and its disguise
  • [A] The figure sequence in our art
  • Comparing our semi-conscious sets
  • Animals, Myth, Grammar, Subconscious layers
  • [B] The structure in our eyes and bodies
  • Our eyes flash Boo; Oto-visual emissions
  • The vortex of visual inspiration
  • Gestalt and Occam
  • Psychological structure
  • [C] The structure in our hands
  • Our inner and outer structures converge
  • Archetype dressed as culture
  • Literate structure in a Mishnah
  • [D] The structure in our cosmos
  • Our astronomical sets
  • The galactic and polar cross
  • Astrological structure
  • 40 [E] The three poles of time
  • 42 Our calendric sets
  • 43 Ages in art
  • 46 Age Aries, Age Pisces, Age Aquarius
  • 50 The typological spiral chart
  • 52 [F] The structure in our art; Honey to mead
  • 54 Conscious and subconscious meaning in art
  • 57 Mystery and initiation
  • 58 Instant culture, art analysis, doubled spheres
  • 62 [G] The layers in our expression
  • 64 Digging through paint layers
  • 67 The double life of decans
  • 68 Decans on the Narmer palette
  • 70 Decans in the Dendera zodiac
  • 72 The Tarot trump sequence
  • 73 Compulsive inspiration and expression
  • 75 [J] Holistic types 1 to 15
  • 79 Typological tables
  • 82 Statistical test of artistic types
  • 84 Statistical test results
  • 87 How to identify types and structure in art
  • 88 Commission impossible
  • 88 Duplications and conventions
  • 89 Conscious recognition is elusive
  • 91 Ambiguous types
  • 93 Scientific and esoteric paradigms
  • 96 Nature is also an artist
  • 97 Esoteric structure
  • 98 Implications for sciences and crafts
  • 99 [L] Mindprint and sixteen themes illustrated
  • [Note; Type labels in the first edition used mythic constellation and hour decanal names, with the warning that typology is also in myth and strology, but does not arise from any media. Type labels have since been updated to generic social function labels; and the four half-types or Basket types have since been defined and demonstrated.]
  • 100  1 Taurus Auriga, Orion; Rain diviner
  • 110  2 Taurus Pleiades, Perseus; Rainmaker
  • 118  3 Aries Andromeda; Moon queen, dragons
  • 130  4 Pisces Pegasus; Sun king, Sun twins
  • 134  5a Aquarius Pegasus; World baptist
  • 148  5b Aquarius; World spirit
  • 160  6 Capricornus; Pan
  • 164  7 Sagittarius; Bag
  • 170  8 Scorpius Ophiuchus; Giant snake holder
  • 180  9 Scorpius; Giant in trance
  • 182  10 Libra Bootes; Lord of the forest
  • 188  11 Virgo; Womb
  • 198  12 Leo Crater; King inverted
  • 212  13 Leo Ursa; King’s heart
  • 224  14 Cancer Ursa Minor; Time angel
  • 232  15 Gemini; Creator and rope churner
  • 240  15 Gemini Canis; Creator wounded
  • 250 How mindprint was discovered
  • 253 Acknowledgements, About the author
  • 254 Terminology
  • 257 Index of rock art tested, Index of art tested
  • 265 Graphics sources, Sources, References.

(Excerpt from Mindprint, the subconscious art code, by Edmond Furter, 2014, Lulu.com)

 

==== Comment from David Allen April 2015;

Thank you for the opportunity to meet you and to listen to your talk. What you said has sent me back to the drawing board concerning my knowledge of archetypes.

What had the most impact for me was your reference to the fact that archetypes, and even culture itself, are not some artificial “construction” born of this reality, but come from a pre-existent reality that “was” before the “big bang”.

The way you supported this contention by showing how virtually one single visual pattern is repeated (with some minor variations) through all works of inspired art (I think your use of the distinction “inspired” was essential here) stretching from as far back as the Ice Age into the modern era, across many nations, cultures, religions, belief systems, continents, and throughout history, and how it can be traced in the heavens, served to emphasise this point particularly strongly for me.

Although the idea of a “pre-existent reality” is not new to me, I have found almost no support for it. If anything I have come across only deep and virulent criticism of it and so have kept an open mind on the subject. Maybe it is a sign that I need to hang out with a better class of reading material.

I found your support of this notion very pleasing because it confirmed something that always made intuitive sense to me. It will give me much food for thought and reflection in the coming weeks and months because it will feed into, and influence to some extent, much else that I am interested in.

But probably the most important revelation was that your talk has shown me how much I still have to learn and how much work awaits me in terms of now having to unpack and discard much of what I have taken to be “true”, and then to refresh my conceptual foundation and belief system concerning a number of important topics.

I begin the task of reading and absorbing your book today. -David Allen.

Categories
How to identify mindprint types and structure in art

How to identify archetypes and structure in art

Finding mindprint in a work of art is as simple as finding correspondences to any archetypally complete set or sets of about sixteen (twelve to twenty) items, such as pantheons (lists of gods), myth cycles, epics, emblems, lunar mansions, trumps, historic or fictional characters, constellations, heraldic devices, lyrics, or animals.

Researchers should tack characters in art to sets that they are familiar with, and use the mindprint axial grid and tables for confirmation (see the post What is mindprint, on this website. See Mindprint, the subconscious art code, by Edmond Furter, 2014, Lulu.com). Here is a shortcut method to finding the basics of the five layers of the archetypal art code;

[] Identify a likely periphery of figures in a roughly elliptical arrangement.

[] List the figures in their circular sequence, by any distinctive attribute, such as a posture, season, function, species, or device.

[] Provisionally tag the list or the artwork, with likely type numbers, such as 10 Teacher  for a figure with arms up or a staff, 12 or 13 Heart for a felid, 1 or 2 Builder for a bovid or tower, 5 Priest for varicoloured, skin paint or a hyperactive posture.

[] Tag figures notably ingressed or egressed towards or away from the centre, as 6 Exile or 14 Mixer.

[] Tag a pregnant figure as 11 Womb; and an adjacent major figure as 12 or 13 Heart (usually with an exposed chest), and the adjacent figure on the other side as 10 Teacher.

[] Infer a clockwise or anticlocwise sequence, and provisionally complete the labellling.

[] Count the number of eyes (for example 17), assume the lower even number (for example 16), subtract two (for example 14), skip half of this number (for example 7) between eyes, and draw tentative axes between each pair of likely opposing eyes.

[] If three or more axes cross at the same point, find the likely 11 Womb, and a likely 12 or 13 Heart, and redraw errant axes by not using their eyes (unless their eyes also find counterparts across the axial centre).

[] If three or more peripheral figures remain unaccounted for, assume a higher equal number (for example 18), and repeat the test with higher numbers.

[] Resolve the sequence by splitting up or combining the major doubles (1 /2 Builder, 5a/5b Priest, 8/9 Healer, 12/13 Heart).

[] Complete all the possible axes. Connect the equator from eye to eye (with the two exceptions).

[] Find one or two polar markers between 11 Womb and 12 Heart, or between 4 King and 5 Priest, near the equator (not near the centre). These poles are often on limb joints.

[] Find a polar marker nearer the axial pole, on or near the 15 Maker, 14 Mixer, or 13 Heart axis; which is often a limb joint, perhaps a jaw, vertical or horizontal from the axial centre or from one of the galactic poles. Connect this marker to the galactic pole to form a polar triangle (or if there is a marker on the opposite side, connect it to the galactic south pole).

[] Mirror the polar triangle on the other side of the ecliptic pole. Polar markers are not always expressed. Infer the inspirational date (spring) from the type that precedes the polar axle (midsummer) by an ideal 90 degrees (approximate, not measured on the distorted grid).

[] Apply the set of labels, one to each figure, and the four structural points, in sequence. Note that there is a choice of two labels (/) at the four major types if they are represented by only one figure (typical if the total is only twelve or fourteen);

1Builder 2Builder 2cBasket 3Queen 4King 4p
8Healer 9Healer 9cLid 10Teacher 11Womb 11p

 

5aPriest 5bPriest 5cTail 6Exile 7Child 7g
12Heart 13Heart 13cHead 14Mixer 15Maker 15g

 

cp csp ? ?

The axial centre or ‘Ecliptic Pole’ is unlabelled to avoid clutter.

[] Half-types (2c Basket v 9c Lid, 5c Tail v 13c Head) are usually off the axial grid, but within their sectors, designated by the axes of the two types that flank each of them.

[] On a separate page, list the type numbers, with basic distinctive features or characters found in the artwork, to compare to other artworks, mindprint statistics, stories, myths or typological sets.

This structure applies to all artworks, in all cultures, in all ages, due to the structure of nature, perception, expression, and cultural media. Mindprint also applies to myths and legends, but it is difficult to extract to a subtext, due to typical fluctuation between characters, places, episodes, and time. In art, the time-slice of the story stands still, and the composition could be verified against the original, or reproductions in catalogues, books and electronic galleries, such as tourist image sites.

See a standard format for testing and reporting structural art or building site analysis, in the post on ;What is mindprint’ on this website.

 

Categories
Mindprint art examples

Mindprint on the Narmer palette front

The Narmer palette front demonstrates subconscious expression of archetypal structure in a decanal set, in stock Sumerian and Egyptian pre-dynastic style. Here is the standard list of the types, with the characters in this artwork, in seasonal sequence from the former spring point, with its analogous hour decan (after Furter 2014; Mindprint).

Type label; Character, (archetypal feature); Decan

  • 03 Queen or Aries; Spouted pot (bent neck); Cetus Tail.
  • 02 Builder or Taurus; Large star (spring?); Pleiades.
  • 01 Builder or Taurus; Sandal-bearer (twisted); Orion.
  • 15 Maker or Gemini; Hathor cow frontal (face); Ursa Minor.
  • 14 Mixer or Cancer; Catfish hammer and chisel, far from the centre (egress), Y-shaped (tree); Ursa on Cancer on Hydra head.
  • 13 Heart or Leo; Horus falcon (raptor); Leo Minor?
  • 11p Galactic Pole; Horus hand (limb-joint); Coma Berenices.
  • 11 Womb or Virgo; Horus abdomen (womb). And an Asiatic marsh subject; Crater?
  • 10 Teacher or Libra; King’s brother’s genitals and hand (bent neck, of 3 opposite); Bootes.
  • 09 Healer or Scorpius; Defeated enemy (twisted, of 2 opposite); Corvus?
  • 08 Healer or Scorpius; Ribbon (snake); Serpens.
  • 07 Child or Sagittarius; Prisoners’ hands (rope); Cygnus?
  • 06 Exile or Capricornus; Prisoner (sacrifice), near the centre (ingress); Piscis Austrinus?
  • 05 Priest or Aquarius; Pond (water); Pegasus Square.
  • 04p Gal.S.Pole; Heel (limb joint) of twin (typical of 4); Cetus?
  • 04 King or Pisces; Heel (typical of 4p) of king (king).
  • The celestial pole marker is on the king’s genitals or shoulder (limb joint), confirmed by the vertical plane of the work. These markers place ‘midsummer’ in Cancer, thus ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Aries or just prior.
  • The general theme on the reverse of the palette is type 3 Queen or Aries, typical of dragons.

The palette carries the same figures, and nearly the same sequence of features, on both sides. On the front, the characters are in a court or festival context, centered on type 15 Maker or Gemini as a smiting, ordering, re-creating pharaoh. Several optional links flip the sequence between the two sides, in the ‘transparent’ method also used in some Egyptian murals.

On the palette’s reverse side, type 13 Heart or Leo is a dwarf, symbol of a client culture paying homage. The dwarf resembles a figure in Queen Hatshepsut’s Punt colonnade, perhaps a Khoe Queen of Sheba.

Mindprint types and structure on the Narmer palette rear (Edmond Furter). The artefact is discussed in more detail among illustrations themed on type t3 t18 Aries in the book.
Narmer palette rear, with standard structuralist labels and axial grid. The artefact is discussed in more detail among other illustrations themed on type 3 Queen or Aries in the book.

The dwarf’s function and conceptual role is as important as the tribe he or she represents. On the subconscious level, the royal figure and heart of type 12/13 Heart or Leo are expressed in a foreign but compliant leader from the interior that feeds the Nile. Some dwarfs are seen as rainmakers (Tressider; Watkins Dictionary of symbols). Empire needs flattery by tribes with apparently semi-human features or languages, considered more in touch with animals and nature, and thus used as rainmakers, herbalists, and fertility or defensive spell casters.

Bushmen and Khoe or Nama (born of occasional pre-Bantu and pre-colonial admixtures) fulfilled these functions to migrating Iron Age African Bantu tribes, and to emergent mixed Korana, Griekwa and Amatola bands in South Africa. They served white settlers even during the systematic genocide and cultural extinction of Bushmen by regional masters such as the Zulu, Dutch and British.

Categories
Mindprint art examples

Mindprint in De Cosimo’s Discovery of honey

Types 8 Healer as a giant tree stump face, hosting a bee colony, with satyrs and people collecting honey and brewing mead (Pierro De Cosimo; Discovery of honey. Typology labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter).

Most characters in the artwork, as in all artworks, are identified by some archetypal features (gender, posture, function, implements or relative position), confirmed by the position of their eyes on an axial grid of opposite pairs.

Type label; Character (noting archetypal features); analogous hour decan:

1 Builder or Taurus; A satyr kid below an adult hand, recalling the goat kids of Artemis; decan Auriga.

2 Builder or Taurus; Crouching (twisted) leader, with a mirror or ladle (rainmaker); decan Orion.

3 Queen or Aries; Wielder of bellows or hammer, instruments of sacrifice (sacrifice); decan Triangulum.

4 King or Pisces; A male, with hive cakes or an implement of two rectangles (rectangle); decan Pegasus.

5 Priest or Aquarius; Priest (priest), prominent (large), with a tuning fork (U-shape, of type 6). Of human appearance, positioned between satyrs and women with human items; decan ?

6 Exile or Capricornus; Boy (child, of type 7), with only lower legs of a goat (Pan); decan Capricornus tail knot.

7 Child or Sagittarius; A centaur, more animal than human; decan Sagittarius.

7g Galactic Centre; Spring or pool (water, juncture); decan ,,,,

8 Healer or Scorpius; Trunk (pillar) mouth, hive of honey (healer, and trance induced by lowered blood pressure and buzzing bees); decan Ophiuchus, Snake Holder.

10 Teacher or Libra; Arm in V-posture (arm/s up), with herbs (staff?); decan Bootes.

11 Womb or Virgo; A midriff (womb); decan Spica.

12 and 13 Heart or Leo; Two chests (heart, heart); decan Ursa and Leo.

14 Mixer or Cancer; Eyes of the types 12 Heart and 11 Womb characters (mixture); decan Hydra head? This type is one of the general themes in the work, of satyrs or goat-people (mixture), mead (brew, transform), and supposed evolution (time).

15 Maker or Gemini; Bacchus (churn of bodies or souls), carrying a passenger (doubled). Axis 15 continues to another doubled figure, a satyr carrying a companion (doubled. See a jackal abducting a sheep in a paradise parody by Cyril Coetzee; T’Kama Adamastor).

Characters in all artworks express optional features, with some minor structuralist imperfections. Here type 7 Child or Sagittarius has his back turned, more usual of adjacent 8 Healer, decan Ophiuchus (which here is combined with type 9 Healer or Scorpius). Type 3 Queen or Aries has it axis not on its eye, but on its hand holding a bellows or hammer, which is a kind of bag or formling, more typical of the types flanking the four galactic corners. The overall sequence and structure remains clear.

‘Cosmic’ equators

The ragged oval or characters is analogous to the Ecliptic Equator in cosmology. The outline in complex works often includes some line economy, uding a continuous line, as here between the eyes of types 1, 15 and 14.

The two ‘Galactic’ Poles (4p and 11p), imply two ‘galactic’ equators, usually on a series of limb joints (here marked by thin, oblique semi-ovals), always crossing the typology outline or ‘ecliptic’ equato between 1-15 and between 7-g. The two ‘galactic’ equators overlap in the interior, and continue around two different ‘hemispheres’ as two exterior lobes. These two equators often divide compositional groups, as here they divide the culture group of people, v the nature group of satyrs.

Subconscious inspiration and conscious composition always overlap, yet artists are not aware of using attributes, postures, a figure sequence, eyes or limbs in the service of any detailed or standard structure. The five layers of cultural expression is inherent in the materials, themes, perceptions and ‘grammar’ or ‘DNA’ of human nature.

Polar triangles in art

The galactic pole (type 11p, or pG) is always near the equator, between types 12 and 11 (decan Crater, Grail); usually on a limb joint, here on the shoulder of a crawling figure, perhaps drunk with mead and thus relevant to grail and elixir themes.

The celestial pole (pC) is usually on a limb joint near the axial centre, and on or near the axis of the current or recent summer solstice, thus near axis 13, 12, 14 or 15. Here the celestial pole is on the shoulder of a satyr mother, between 14 and 15, where the celestial pole was in Age Aries late; but her elbow marks an earlier Age (of a perceived natural and cultural paradise) and her jaw (often a polar point) marks Cosimo’s forthcoming (now current) Age Pisces-Aquarius.

The ‘galactic south’ pole, 4p or pGs, is always between axes 4 and 5, but not always marked. Here it is on the jaw (limb joint) of an extra character (identified on an eye in error, before the role of limb joints was statistically confirmed).

The ‘celestial south’ pole on the hip of type 3 Queen or Aries tags the inspiration as Age Aries late, or Age Pisces early, at the time of the perceived formation of De Cosimo’s Christian culture.

Inspirational dating is a subtle geometric, mythical, conceptual and iconographic aspect of cultural expression, demonstrating the depth of the holographic structure in artistic inspiration. Even gifted nature spirits such as De Cosimo, on par with the best artists and rock artists in the world by any definition, did not consciously know mindprint, and could not fake it.

Both sides of a flat sphere

Mindprint structure is analogous to a sphere, imagined from above the sun, and simultaneously from above the earth. Armillary spheres, the basis of time and navigation instruments such as astrolabes, also express space and time by these two apparently contradictory perspectives. In addition to the dual ‘angelic’ perspective from infinitely far above (which is north in archetype, as it is in convention), the mirrored perspective from the south is included in cultural media and expressions. A model of perception requires parts of two armillary spheres, the northern one flared out and cut generously around its equator to retain zodiac and southern decan asterisms (see the cosmology image in another post); as well as the complete southern galactic equator. The southern hemisphere is cut stingily to avoid zodiac duplication, but its mirrored view of the galaxy is retained partly inside the ‘squashed’ centre, and partly on the flared rim outside the equator of characters.

Thus artworks contain two armillary sets, of three poles and five equators each. The central poles appear as one point, since they are viewed or ‘squashed’ along their own axle, revealing that culture is spatially ‘projected’ on the ecliptic plane, leaving the celestial and galactic equators oblique. Celestial equators are not shown in structuralist analyses, for the sake of simplicity.

There are no degrees of difficulty in the miracles of nature, perception and cultural expression. The resulting myth map differs from astronomical maps in reducing the celestial pole (of daily rotation) to a minor role; to focus on the ecliptic plane (of yearly orbit).

Categories
Mindprint art examples

Mindprint and decans in the Dendera zodiac

The Dendera round zodiac ceiling demonstrates the subconscious imprint in a quadruple concentric set of constellations, signs, decans and determinants (Louvre, and in a plaster cast replacement at Dendera in Egypt. Typology labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter). The four sets each follow the eye positions of the sixteen types as usual. These sets are uniquely vortexed relative to one another. The spring and polar section is inset for clarity.

A spring equinox baboon marker sits back-to-back with type 3 Queen or Aries or decan Triangulum, as a slaughtered quarry. Their tails or entrails together reach down to the Aries ram tail, which in turn hangs down to the type 4 King or Pisces ribbons (where the Cetus Whale tail is figured in myth, and in the sky).

A baboon is a movable spring feature, expressing precession (as noted in an obscure Greek tradition) among the types, thus not a type itself, nor a constellation or decan. It marks one or both of the equinoxes, and also finds expression in one of Thoth’s manifestations, resolving some of his emblematic ambiguities.

The spring sun or moon is under the baboon, displaced from 3 Aries to just on the 4 King or Pisces side of the tails, which also extend the Pisces latter ribbon, or forms a third ribbon (see the Cosmic myth map in another post). The spring sun or moon determinant (pictorial sign) is repeated at 4 Pisces constellation, as a character holding a spring sacrifice, formerly a feature of type 3 Queen or Aries, subconsciously dragged into the Age Pisces position in this work of dynamic subconscious structure.

The opposite sun or moon or lunar node is at type 9 Healer or Scorpius, but pictured in type 10 or decan Libra, confirming the usual ambiguity among precession markers and decans (Furter 2014; Mindprint, chapter on hour decans, noting how the night hour markers starting point change through the year, and their emblematic ambiguity).

The four major constellations are doubled in the Dendera round zodiac, as they are in all complex artworks and building sites (Furter 2016) worldwide. All sixteen typology axes are uniquely, subconsciously vortexed in order to link the eyes of northern, ecliptic and southern decans, to galactic or determinant characters in the border (see similar but linearly regimented decans in the Dendera crypt lotus bulb carving, in the book Mindprint).

Stereotypical zodiacs usually do not express the archetypal sequence, nor the axial ocular (eye to eye) structure. The elegant vortex here indicates inspired structuralist detail, beyond the needs of astrology or astronomy (see a vortex in rock art in the book Mindprint, Chapter 7).

This ceiling is useless to astronomical observation or calibration, but a timeless record of our collective need to imprint and review subconscious structuralist calibration, enabling the collective therapy of expressing who, what, where, when and how we fit into nature, and ultimately into archetype. Thus mindprint is revealed as subconscoius ‘graffiti’ behavioru, largely independent of our conscious motives, and of our semi-conscious mechanisms for using cultural goods to bond, appropriate spiritual goods, and exploit rival polities. All cultures use the same core content in their apparently ‘different’ ethnography (this theme is expanded in the 2019 paper Blueprint, on http://www.edmondfurter.wordpress.com).

Some authors read the Dendera zodiac as having been partially re-carved to add Greek and Roman constellations to Babylonian and Egyptian constellations, and to update the poles to precession, thus accounting for ‘generally misplaced’ features. But all these sets are now revealed as subconsciously but rigorously placed on a vortexed axial grid. The solution here indicates a single, inspired design, matched to nearly all the constellations. The only slightly displaced characters, probably due to design constraints, are type 13 Heart or Leo; the polar Ursa bull foreleg, 7g-15g and 4p-11p axes, and polar Draco Hercules Taweret hippo (the latter perhaps just differently constituted, an issue unresolved in Egyptology).

Spherical grid distortion arises from moving the perspective, or projection point of an axial grid, without moving the grid. However projectional distortion is seldom symmetrical or uniformly rotated, as this grid is.

There is no hint in archaeology, art history or esoterica of the conscious use of a vortex axial grid elsewhere. The stroke of inspired genius to express precession by dragging either the peripheral sequence backward, or the polar sequence forward, is probably subconscious, as all 100 known features on the five layers of structure are.

The sets of poles are expressed by the position of certain limb joints, as usual. The axial centre or ecliptic pole is on the jaw (limb-joint) of the Whippet jackal on a plough (Ursa Minor); itself on a bull foreleg (part of Draco, more often also Ursa Minor, or Ursa in older artworks).

11p Galactic Pole is on a staff foot (limb-joint). 4p Galactic South Pole is on an extra fish jaw (limb-joint), figuring constellation Pisces prior fish on conscious iconic level, but expressing type 4p decan Cetus (Whale) Spout on the subconscious level.

Midsummer or Celestial Pole is on type 15 Maker, Gemini, or decan Ursa Minor, as the jaw (limb-joint) of a tiny rear-facing canid, reclining on the other side of the bull foreleg, which is a slightly misplaced type 13 Heart, Leo, or decan Ursa Major (continuing its earlier structuralist function in Age Taurus as celestial polar calibrator).

Midwinter or Celestial South Pole or autumn axis is on the jaw (limb-joint) of the Taweret hippo (who more usually figures the axial centre or Ecliptic Pole). Her polar womb is on the type 10 Teacher or Libra axis, a potential precessional ambiguity in this transitional expression; however the type 10 decan is Bootes, and its genital star Arcturus is on the eternal ecliptic grid directly above the Virgo womb star Spica. Subconscious behaviour has no need to resolve apparent conscious ambiguities.

The celestial pole or midsummer over Gemini, tags ‘spring’ and the time-frame of the inspiration to Age Pisces. Most artworks express a previous time-frame. The Celestial South Pole or midwinter over 6-7, places spring in Age Aries-Pisces, confirming the spring sun or moon entering Pisces, and the archaeological dating as Ptolemaic, in the early centuries AD.

  • After a chapter in Mindprint, the subconscious art code, by Edmond Furter, 2014, Lulu.com. Updated January 2019.